High Court
Case Details
1 Reserved On:- 20.04.2023 Delivered On:- 26.04.2023 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6935 of 2022 Appellant :- Aman Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh,Sundeep Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Manjesh Singh Yadav, Raj Kumar Dhama Hon'ble Siddharth, J. 1.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Sri Bhuvnesh Kumar Singh and Sri Sundeep Shukla, learned counsels for the appellant; Sri Anshul Kumar Gupta, Advocate holding brief of Sri Manjesh Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State. 2. 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 22.08.2022 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Meerut has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 127 of 2022, under Section- 306 IPC and Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Pallavpuram, District- Meerut. 3. There is allegation in the first information report that the daughter of the informant aged about 19 years was a student of B.A part 1. The applicant used to frequent house of informant and was physically and mentally harassing her daughter for last 3 months. On 28.04.2022, at about 7 p.m he enticed away her daughter and her whereabouts were not known. They were searching her when at about 12 p.m a call came from Bijnor, made by police, informing that the condition of the daughter of informant 2 is very serious. She has consumed some poisonous substance. It was informed that the daughter of the informant is being sent by ambulance to Meerut Medical College. The informant went to Meerut Medical College and found that the deceased had died. The appellant and co-accused, Yogesh accompanied the daughter of informant in ambulance but when they reached Meerut Medical College the appellant was not found. He threatened the informant of dire consequences if some action is taken by the informant against him. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that it is a case of malicious prosecution under the provisions of SC/ST Act. The first information report was lodged after 24 hours is of the incident only to falsely implicate the the appellant. At the time of incident dated 28.04.2022 the applicant was in district Bijnor. The deceased left her house alone as clear from the CCTV footage collected during investigation. She was pressurising the appellant to marry her and had consumed some toxic substance. After consuming the same, she informed her relatives and the appellant. The whatsapp chat of the deceased with the appellant have been brought on record by way of supplementary affidavit and it is also part of the case diary. In the whatsapp chat, the victim had clearly stated that now she has consumed sulphas, at least now the applicant should talk to her. He has pointed out to the number of whatsapp chat between the deceased and the appellant which shows that the deceased was pressurising the appellant to marry her and the appellant was reluctant. He has submitted that it is a case of one-sided love affair. The appellant is in jail since 02.05.2022 and the ingredients for constituting the offences under sections 306 read with Section 107 IPC are not made out against the appellant. It is a case of malicious prosecution under the provisions of SC/ST Act. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 3 5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A vehemently opposed the appeal and have submitted that because of the conduct of the appellant the deceased committed suicide. Had the applicant not entered into affair with the deceased she would not have committed suicide. 6. After hearing the rival submissions, this court finds that there is no material on record which may compel this Court to believe that the appellant abetted the deceased to commit suicide. It appears that the appellant had broken his relationship with the deceased but she was not willing to part ways. When she left to meet the appellant by bus she consumed poison and by the time she reached the place of appellant, the physical condition of victim had deteriorated a lot and subsequently she died. 7. 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 22.08.2022 is, hereby, set aside. 8. 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. 4 9. Let appellant, Aman, 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. (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. 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. 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. 5 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. The criminal appeal is allowed. Order Date :- 26.04.2023 Rohit Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad