High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89428 Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3245 of 2023
Legal Reasoning
Appellant :- Rajveer Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Anil Kumar Srivastava,Chandra Prakash Pandey,Harikesh,Lalit Prakash,Shailendra Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. Despite service of notice, none is present on behalf of opposite party no. 2. 2. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as SC/ST Act) has been preferred by the appellant Rajveer with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 16.02.2023 passed by the leaned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Pilibhit and to release him on bail in Session Trial No. 1647 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 428 of 2022, under Sections 302/34, 376, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2) (v)SC/ST Act, Police Station Madhotanda, District Pilibhit. 3. The prosecution has come-forwarded with the story that on 07.09.2022 at about 12.00 in the noon when Mansi Devi, daughter of the informant aged about 17 years was all alone in the hous, the accused persons Rajveer and Tarachand @ Tarun Kumar entered into the house and Rajveer committed rape upon her and also threatened for life. When she protested, diesel oil filled in a gallon was poured by the accused Tarachand @ Tarun Kumar upon her and set her ablaze and hurled abuses by caste related remarks. F.I.R. was lodged on 10.09.2022 and investigation started. The victim was taken to the hospital where her dying declaration was recorded by the S.D.M. Sadar, Pilibhit and subsequently when the investigating Officer reached there for recording her statement, he was told by doctor that her condition was very serious and she was unable to speak and it was not possible to get her statement recorded. However, subsequently her statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer. After concluding the investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted charge sheet before the court and subsequently charges were also framed against the accused appellant Rajveer. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent, he has not committed the alleged offence but he has been falsely implicated in this case. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. It is further submitted that in the instant case two dying declarations of the deceased were recorded. The first dying declaration was recorded by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Pilibhit on 10.09.2022 and the second dying declaration was recorded by the Investigating Officer on 13.09.2022 wherein she stated that Rajveer and Tarachand @ Tarun Kumar entered into her house and made an attempt to rape her and when she protested, Tarachand @ Tarun Kumar poured diesel oil upon her and set her ablaze. She also disclosed that she belonged to SC/ST community. The deceased died on 19.09.2022 after twelve days of the incident. It is next submitted that there are material contradictions in the dying declarations of the deceased. It is next submitted that there is no eye witness of the alleged incident and she was seen by her sister in burnt condition when she came back from her school and informed other persons regarding the incident. It is also submitted that in the postmortem report the cause of death of the deceased is due to antemortem burn injuries. 5. It is further submitted that the F.I.R. of this case was lodged after three days of the incident without any plausible explanation of this inordinate delay. It is next submitted that as a matter of fact, the appellant has given Rs. 5,000/- to the informant as debt and when it was demanded by him, the informant refused and some hot-talk took place between them and due to this animosity the informant falsely implicated the appellant in the present case. It is also submitted that since the deceased was not in a position to speak, the alleged dying declaration on her part is a concocted story of the prosecution and no recording was made of the alleged dying declaration by way of video clip. There was no certificate given by the doctor that the victim girl was in a position to speak and her dying declaration could be recorded. It is next submitted that although Criminal Appeal No. 3033 of 2023 filed by the co- accused Tarachand @ Tarun Kumar has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 17.07.2023 but it creates no adverse effect upon the case of the present appellant. It is further submitted that the accused appellant has no criminal history to his credit and he is languishing in jail since 11.05.2022. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the present appeal and it has been submitted that the learned trial court has passed a legal and well reasoned order by which the bail application of the appellant was rejected. It is further submitted that in the statement of the victim herself an active participation and main role of the present appellant has been found and a gallon of five liters was also found near the place of the occurrence from which smell of diesel oil was coming out. The death of the deceased was caused due to antemortem burn injuries, therefore, the appellant is not entitled for bail. There is no major contradiction in both the statements of the deceased. 7. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully. 8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, and also considering the role played by the present accused in commission of the crime and two dying declarations of the deceased, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has not made out a case for bail. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. Hence, the appeal having no force is liable to be dismissed. 9. Accordingly, the criminal appeal is dismissed. Order Date :- 26.5.2025 Rmk. Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad