High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8791 of 2022 Appellant :- Bhagwan Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Arvind Agrawal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. List has been revised. Despite service of notice on opposite party no.2, no one has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose this appeal.
Legal Reasoning
Heard learned counsel for the appellant; learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record. 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 14.9.2022 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Mathura, has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No.402 of 2022, under Sections 452, 307, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)V SC/ST Act, Police Station Vrindavan, District Mathura. There is allegation in the FIR that daughter of the informant aged about 23 years was alone in the house today, i.e., 17.8.2022, when about 4:00 p.m. the appellant entered into his house and attacked his daughter by axe on her face. Informant took his daughter to the hospital, from where she was referred to Neuro Hospital Mathura. The appellant used caste related abuse against him and threatened him on life in case he proceeded with any proceeding. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that it is a case of absolutely false implication. He has pointed out to the first medical examination report of the victim dated 17.8.2022 issued by District Combined Hospital, Vrindavan. On top of the report, it is mentioned that it is an accidental case and the victim has herself approached for medical examination. In the medial report initially lacerated wounds were found on the head, right side fact and back chest of the injured and also on her right elbow region, but there is overwriting in the medical report and all the lacerated wounds have been shown as incised wounds by way of overwriting in the medical report, which is clear from bare perusal of the same. He has further submitted that there is prior enmity between the first informant and the appellant and his brother. Prior to present implication, the appellant was implicated in Case Crime No.784 of 2021, which was lodged under Sections 323, 452, 376, 506, 507 and Section 3(2)V SC/ST Act. This Court granted bail to the appellant vide Criminal Appeal No.4924 of 2021 with the finding that there appears to be consensual relationship between the prosecutrix and appellant for long. It has been submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is a case of malicious prosecution of the appellant under the provisions of SC/ST Act. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 21.8.2022. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 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 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. 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 14.9.2022 is, hereby, set aside. 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. Let appellant, Bhagwan Singh, 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. 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 :- 2.5.2023 Ruchi Agrahari Digitally signed by :- RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad