High Court · 2025

Heard Suresh Chandra Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Amit, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.366 of 2022, under Sections 376-D, 326-A, 325, 307, 504, 506 IPC, 3/4 POCSO Act and 3(2)V SC/ST Act, Police Station Iglas, District- Aligarh, during pendency of trial. There are allegations against the applicant, two named and one unknown accused in the FIR that on 12.7.2022 when sowing paddy crops was being prepared, at 7:30 p.m. daughter of the informant, aged about 17 years, and his daughter-in-law went inside the room made on the agricultural field for drinking water, where applicant and co-accused caught hold his daughter and daughter-in-law on gun point and committed the offence of rape against them. When informant went in their search she saw the incident and raised alarm, then her son, Vishnu, and her husband, Chandra Pal, came. Accused persons pointed country-made pistol towards the informant and others and applicant threw acid on her son. He was saved by her husband from accused after lot of requests. While leaving, they hurdled caste related abuses and threatened the informant and others of life. Police was dialed on number 112 and it took the son of the informant to the hospital. He suffered fracture in his finger and her daughter and daughter-in-law also suffered injuries in the incident. The police recorded statements of the injured and the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the statement of the doctor recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. by the Investigating Officer, he did not found any grievous injury to the informant, her daughter and daughter-in-law. Simple injures were found on non vital parts of their body in the form of scratches. Injured, Vishnu, suffered burn injuries on his right chest and his right hand was also burnt. His ultrasound and X-ray reports were normal. In the pathology report of two women, no trace of spermatozoa was found by the doctor. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there is long criminal history of old enmity between the parties since the year 2010. In the supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant, the details of seven cases lodged by the informant, her son and daughter-in-law against applicant side have been detailed. All these cases were lodged by the informant side, the applicant and and his family members were implicated. Learned counsel for the applicant has brought on record the document to prove that the informant and her family members have received Rs.4,83,600/- towards compensation from the State Government due to the cases lodged by them against different persons. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the acid injury was caused to injured somewhere else, but the applicant and other accused have been falsely implicated in this case. He has placed before this Court the extract of case diary, which shows that the Investigating Officer has found that the informant side has lodged number of cases under SC/ST Act against applicant side to get financial help from the government. It has also been found by the Investigating Officer that the informant and her family members are habitual of lodging such FIRs for the purpose of getting compensation from the State Government since they belong to scheduled caste. The applicant is in jail since 18.4.2024. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. After haring the rival contentions, this Court finds that applicant is in jail since 18.4.2024. His history consists of seven cases lodged by the same informant or her family members. The police has found that the informant and her family members are habitual falsely implicating persons for getting compensation from the State Government since they belong to scheduled castes. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, 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, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant 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 Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) The applicant 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 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant 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 against him in accordance with law. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 25.4.2025 Ruchi Agrahari RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Heard Suresh Chandra Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Amit, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.366 of 2022, under Sections 376-D, 326-A, 325, 307, 504, 506 IPC, 3/4 POCSO Act and 3(2)V SC/ST Act, Police Station Iglas, District- Aligarh, during pendency of trial. There are allegations against the applicant, two named and one unknown accused in the FIR that on 12.7.2022 when sowing paddy crops was being prepared, at 7:30 p.m. daughter of the informant, aged about 17 years, and his daughter-in-law went inside the room made on the agricultural field for drinking water, where applicant and co-accused caught hold his daughter and daughter-in-law on gun point and committed the offence of rape against them. When informant went in their search she saw the incident and raised alarm, then her son, Vishnu, and her husband, Chandra Pal, came. Accused persons pointed country-made pistol towards the informant and others and applicant threw acid on her son. He was saved by her husband from accused after lot of requests. While leaving, they hurdled caste related abuses and threatened the informant and others of life. Police was dialed on number 112 and it took the son of the informant to the hospital. He suffered fracture in his finger and her daughter and daughter-in-law also suffered injuries in the incident. The police recorded statements of the injured and the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the statement of the doctor recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. by the Investigating Officer, he did not found any grievous injury to the informant, her daughter and daughter-in-law. Simple injures were found on non vital parts of their body in the form of scratches. Injured, Vishnu, suffered burn injuries on his right chest and his right hand was also burnt. His ultrasound and X-ray reports were normal. In the pathology report of two women, no trace of spermatozoa was found by the doctor. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there is long criminal history of old enmity between the parties since the year 2010. In the supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant, the details of seven cases lodged by the informant, her son and daughter-in-law against applicant side have been detailed. All these cases were lodged by the informant side, the applicant and and his family members were implicated. Learned counsel for the applicant has brought on record the document to prove that the informant and her family members have received Rs.4,83,600/- towards compensation from the State Government due to the cases lodged by them against different persons. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the acid injury was caused to injured somewhere else, but the applicant and other accused have been falsely implicated in this case. He has placed before this Court the extract of case diary, which shows that the Investigating Officer has found that the informant side has lodged number of cases under SC/ST Act against applicant side to get financial help from the government. It has also been found by the Investigating Officer that the informant and her family members are habitual of lodging such FIRs for the purpose of getting compensation from the State Government since they belong to scheduled caste. The applicant is in jail since 18.4.2024. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. After haring the rival contentions, this Court finds that applicant is in jail since 18.4.2024. His history consists of seven cases lodged by the same informant or her family members. The police has found that the informant and her family members are habitual falsely implicating persons for getting compensation from the State Government since they belong to scheduled castes. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, 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, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant 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 Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) The applicant 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 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant 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 against him in accordance with law. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 25.4.2025 Ruchi Agrahari RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad