Manoj Sahu v. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No
Case Details
Court No. - 88 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 715 of 2022
Legal Reasoning
Appellant :- Manoj Sahu Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Awadhesh Prasad,Shiv Bahadur Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Shrikant Chaturvedi Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P., learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant / opposite party no. 2 and perused the record. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 21.01.2022 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Jhansi in Bail Application No. 91 of 2022 (Manoj Sahu vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 522 of 2021, under Sections 304, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Jhansi. In short compass, the facts of the case as unfolded by the prosecution are that the informant, wife of deceased has lodged an F.I.R. on 24.11.2021 regarding an incident which took place on 23.11.2021 against the appellant alleging inter- alia that she along with her husband lives in the house of the appellant on rent. On 23.11.2021, a quarrel has taken place between the informant and her husband and on hearing the same, appellant came up and mounted pressure upon them to vacate the house. On refusing the same by her husband, the appellant in a fit of rage pushed him over staircase whereby he fell down, blood started oozing out from his head and he fainted and when a request was made by her for providing medical treatment, he did not provide the same. It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is an admitted fact that the deceased was his tenant and on the day of incident, deceased and informant were quarreling with each other. Since, the deceased had drunk a lot of alcohol, therefore, he slipped from the staircase and fell down. As the deceased and the informant were habitual to quarrel with each other, therefore, they were asked by the appellant to vacate the rented portion of his house. Much emphasis has been given by contending that the deceased (husband of the informant) was brought to the hospital by the appellant and got him admitted there on 23.11.2021 at 09:45 pm. In support of his submission and in order to show his bona-fide, he has placed reliance upon the medical document of Emergency OPD filed as annexure no. 3 to the afÏdavit wherein it is mentioned that the patient was brought by the appellant. An F.I.R. of the same has been lodged on 24.11.2021. There is no motive against the appellant to commit such crime as alleged by the informant. Appellant is law abiding person and has no criminal antecedents. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of the appellant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The appellant is languishing in jail since 25.11.2021 and in case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposed the prayer for bail by contending that in fact the appellant had pushed the deceased over staircase therefore he fell down and received injuries and later on he succumbed to his injuries on 25.11.2021 at 03:00 pm. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, relying upon the medical document filed as Annexxure no. 3, has pointed out that on the prescription of the deceased, appellant has mentioned that patient received injuries on account of his own fall from the staircase, therefore, no legal action is required. It is also submitted that the appellant has also not extended any financial help in the treatment of deceased, therefore, the instant bail application is liable to be rejected. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the matter in its entirety, I find that the quarrel between the informant and her husband (deceased) has been admitted by the informant herself and so far as the allegation of informant that appellant had pushed her husband over staircase is concerned, the same is a matter of evidence before the trial court because the case of the appellant is that the deceased himself slipped from the staircase and fell down. From the record also, this much is clear that the deceased was brought to the hospital by the appellant and as on date, no positive evidence of motive against the appellant has come out, accordingly, this Court is of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. Let the appellant Manoj Sahu involved in the above Case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 22.7.2022 Saurabh Digitally signed by SAURABH KUMAR Date: 2022.07.28 12:32:34 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad