High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2009 of 2022
Legal Reasoning
Appellant :- Rekha Devi Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Prem Prakash Yadav,Shri Prakash Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. On the matter being taken up, Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel, whose name is showing as counsel appearing for opposite party no. 2 is not present even in the revised call. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. 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 04.03.2022 passed by learned Special/Exclusive Judge (SC/ST Act), Varanasi in Bail Application No. 614 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 367 of 2020, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 406, 34, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Cantt., District Varanasi. As per prosecution case in brief, informant has lodged the first information report on 13.04.2020 against 12 named accused persons alleging inter alia that the company working in the name and style of Awesome Infra Project Limited induced the informant to deposit the money which would be doubled and in terms of the said inducement, the informant has deposited Rs. 4200/-, however, subsequently, no money was paid as promised and thus, an offence was said to have been committed. Main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant is not named in the first information report and no role has been attributed to him. During investigation, complicity of the appellant came into light in the statement of one Pawan Kumar who was working as an Agent in the aforesaid Company wherein he has stated that the present appellant Rekha Devi was also working as Agent alongwith him. Therefore, on the basis of said statement, the appellant has also made accused in the present case. It is next submitted that there is no direct or indirect evidence against the present appellant Rekha Devi regarding her involvement in the alleged offence. It is also pointed out that other co-accused persons, namely, Dharmendra Kumar, Rajendra Prasad, Ajay Prakash, Amar Nath Maurya and Rajeev Kumar Prajapati, who are named in the first information report have been granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 20.11.2020, 21.01.2021, 16.03.2022, 16.06.2021 and 09.12.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 40620 of 2020, 4468 of 2021, 42499 of 2021 and in Criminal Appeal Nos. 3374 of 2021 and 1947 of 2021, respectively, hence the appellant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The appellant is having criminal history of two cases being Case Crime No. 342 of 2020, under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34, 201, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Cantt., District Varanasi and Case Crime No. 368 of 2020, under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Cantt., District Varanasi in which the appellant has been granted anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 18.01.2021 and 01.06.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. Nos. 9868 of 2020 and 5761 of 2021, copy of the said orders have been brought on record as Annexure No. 2 to the Rejoinder AfÏdavit. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant 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 09.02.2022 and in case she is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid factual aspects of the case as argued on behalf of the appellant. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find substance in the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is not named in the first information report and no specific role has been attributed to the appellant and co-accused Dharmendra Kumar, Rajendra Prasad, Ajay Prakash, Amar Nath Maurya and Rajeev Kumar Prajapati, who are named in the first information report, under similar accusation have been granted bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the accusation, severity of punishment, evidence, complicity of the accused, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail on the ground of parity. 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 - Rekha Devi 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:- (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 she is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she 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 :- 22.8.2022 Shubham Digitally signed by SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI Date: 2022.08.23 13:26:01 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad