High Court
Case Details
1 Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:120090 Reserved On:- 18.05.2023 Delivered On:- 26.05.2023 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2175 of 2023 Appellant :- Raheesh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Kameshwar Singh,Sudhanshu Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Abhay Raj Yadav,Rajesh Kumar Hon'ble Siddharth, J. 1.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Shri Kameshwar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant; Shri Sudhakar Shukla holding brief of Shri Rajesh Kumar,learned counsel for the informant, and learned A.G.A. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant, Raheesh, to set aside the impugned order dated 15.02.2023 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Banda has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by her in Case Crime No. 9 of 2023, under Sections- 376, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kamasin, District- Banda. 3. There is allegation in the FIR that the informant had gone to the Court on 05.01.2023 and was returning to her village when the appellant met in the way. He belongs to her village. The appellant was driving a four wheeler and she was coming back in the four wheeler to her village. Suddenly at about 09:00 p.m he stopped the vehicle and committed the offence of rape against her and thereafter extended threats against disclosure of the incident to anyone. 2 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that it is a case of false implication. In the year 2021, the victim had lodged an FIR under Sections 395, 397, 376-D, 452, 324 IPC against five persons of the village which was found to be false. She has lodged the present case also only to get compensation from the government. There is dispute regarding money between the appellant and the husband of the informant who is required to pay Rs. 20,000/- to the appellant which he was not returning and hence she has falsely implicated him. The appellant has criminal history of one case also under SC/ST Act. The order of the Court below is not justified. The appellant is in jail since 13.01.2023. 5. Counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A have vehemently opposed the appeal of the appellant. They have submitted that the victim has supported the allegation made in the FIR in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The statement of her husband was also recorded wherein he admitted that the victim informed him about the entire incident which took place against her. On being questioned about the identity proof and caste certificate by the investigating officer, the informant stated that the caste certificate has not been made and other documents she will supply after searching them in her house. The amount of Rs. 5,000/- has been received by the informant towards compensation from the government. Before the doctor, she has sated that on the fateful day the appellant met him in the way when she was coming back from the Court after attending date. Seven persons were sitting in the four wheeler. All of them got down in the way and only the appellant and the victim remained in the vehicle when about 2-3 km from racha mod at about 09:00 p.m, the appellant committed the alleged offence against her. In the medical report of the victim, no injury has been found. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has affirmed the allegations made in the FIR and in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. 6. Learned A.G.A has vehemently opposed the appeal of the appellant. 3 7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature. But they could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the appellant is released on bail, they will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. 8. It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the Court below has not properly considered the facts of the case. Hence, in view of above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the court below dated 15.02.2023 is, hereby, set aside. 9. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; appellant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 10. Let appellant, Raheesh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions: (i) 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 officer or tamper with the evidence. 4 (ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses (iii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. (iv) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court. (v) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. (vi) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed in accordance with law. 12. The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the appellant, if there is no other legal impediment. 13. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. 14. The criminal appeal is allowed. 15. Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial of the appellant as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months. 16. Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court for necessary compliance within ten days. Order Date :- 26.05.2023 Rohit 5 Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad