High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:124797 RESERVED ON - 22.5.2023 DELIVERED ON - 06.06.2023 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4044 of 2023 Appellant :- Adesh Yadav Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ganesh Shankar Dubey,Sudhir Kumar Agarwal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Dhirendra Kumar Srivastav Hon'ble Siddharth,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the appellant is taken on record. 2.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Shri S.K. Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant; Shri Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record. 3. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant to set aside the impugned order dated 20.10.2022, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST(P.A.) Act, Allahabad has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 38 of 2016, under Section 302 IPC and Section 3(2) (V) SC/ST Act, Police Station Lalapur, District Prayagraj. 4. This is the second criminal appeal. The first criminal appeal no. 5980 of 2018 of appellant was rejected by the coordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 23.4.2019. 5. There is allegation in the First Information Report that on 5.5.2016 the marriage of the daughter of Arjun Adivashi(Kol) was taking place that at 8.30 P.M. when the appellant came armed with country made pistol and caused gun shot injury to the cousin of the informant, Jhallar Adivashi(Kol) as a result of which he died on the spot. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that earlier also appellant approached this court by way of Criminal Appeal No. 5980 of 2018 for enlargement on bail by the order dated 23.4.2019. The appeal was rejected and trial court was directed to conclude the trail as per provisions contained in Section 309 Cr.P.c. within a period six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. When the trial was not concluded , he applied again before the trial court for consideration of his bail application but by order dated 20.10.2022,the second bail application of the appellant was also rejected by the trial court. The appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. The prosecution witnesses are not appearing before the trial court. Appellant has sought bail on the ground of detention since appellant is in jail since 16.5.2016.There is no possibility of earlier conclusion of trial. It is a case of malicious prosecution under the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act. He has no criminal history to his credit. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the appellant have supported the order passed by the 2 of 5 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 he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the appellant is released on bail, he 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 case of the appellant. Hence, in view of above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the court below dated 20.10.2022 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, Adesh Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like 3 of 5 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. (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. 10. 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. 4 of 5 11. The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously within a period of one year in accordance with law after the release of the appellant, if there is no other legal impediment. 12. 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. 13. Registrar (Compliance) of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the trial for compliance within two week. 14. The criminal appeal is allowed. Order Date :- 06.06.2023 Atul kr. sri. Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad 5 of 5