High Court · 2025

1. Learned AGA informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including upto date case diary and charge sheet in this case has already been submitted. 2. Heard Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 3. This appeal has been preferred under Section 14 (A) (2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against impugned order dated 27.08.2024, passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, (SC/ST Act), Shrawasti, in case Crime No. 139/2021, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) (r), 3(1) (s) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Bhinga, District Shrawasti, whereby the bail application of the appellants/applicants has been rejected. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants has placed before this Court a copy of the charge sheet submitted by the Investigating OfÏcer in the instant case, the same is taken on record. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently submits that the appellants have falsely been implicated in this case and after lodging of the First Information Report they have cooperated with the investigation and had remained present before the Investigating OfÏcer as and when their presence was required and therefore there was neither any occasion nor any opportunity available to the Investigating OfÏcer to have arrested them and the charge sheet has been filed, however, when they moved an application for regular bail before the trial court the same has been rejected by passing impugned order. 6. It is vehemently submitted that the agony of the appellants is that they have not been arrested by the Investigating ofÏcer during investigation and by rejecting their bail application by the trial court, they have been confined in prison while an undertaking was offered that they will cooperate in the trial as they have cooperated with the investigation. The appellants are not having any criminal antecedent and are in jail in this case since 29.7.2024. 7. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that there is no illegality so far as the impugned order is concerned as the appellants have committed an heinous offence. 8. Perusal of the record would reveal that after lodging of the FIR the charge sheet has been submitted on 15.7.2021. Though it is not evident when the charge sheet has been received by the special court but it may safely be inferred that when the bail application of the appellants was disposed of by the trial court/ special court in all probability the charge sheet should have been available before the Special Court. It also appears to be an admitted situation that the appellants have not been arrested by the Investigating OfÏcer during the course of investigation and it has been canvassed before this Court that the appellants have cooperated throughout the investigation. 9. Thus, the grievance of the appellants appear to be that when they have not been arrested by the Investigating OfÏcer during the course of investigation and have cooperated in the investigating and only their presence was required before the trial court for expeditious disposal of the case, there was no occasion available before the Special Court to have rejected their bail application. 10. Having considered all the facts and circumstances as well as the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having an eye on the specific fact that the appellants were not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge sheet has been filed in penal sections punishable with less than seven years imprisonment, a case of interim bail is emerging in favour of the appellants as having regard to Section 15-A (3) of the SC/ST Act, the victim is required to be informed about the pendency of the instant proceedings. 11. Issue notice to the respondents no. 2, 3 and 4 returnable till the next date of listing. 12. Steps in this regard be taken by appellant within three working days from today. 13. List on 26.09.2024, by which date the State if so wish may also file counter afÏdavit/ objections along with the proof of service on respondents no. 2, 3 and 4. 14. In the meantime, the appellants-applicants Malikram @ Ram Kumar Verma @ Kumar Verma and Vikas Verma are released on interim bail on their furnishing personal bonds of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the special court subject to following conditions:- (i) The appellants shall not tamper with the evidence of witnesses and shall not commit any offence. (ii) The appellants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 appellants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case, the appellants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the appellants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174- A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) The appellants 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 appellants is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 15. Observations made herein-above are only for the purpose of disposal of bail application and the same shall not have any bearing on the trial of the case. 16. List as directed on 26.09.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants who were enlarged on interim bail vide aforesaid order have never misused the liberty granted by this Court and they are ready to cooperate in the trial. It is thus submitted that appellants may be enlarged on regular bail.

6. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of the appellants, but he does not dispute the fact that interim bail application of the appellants has already been allowed by this Court vide order dated 10.9.2024.

7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, contents of the appeal, bail application including the order of interim bail dated 10.9.2024, it is evident that appellants have never misused the liberty of interim bail granted by this Court.

8. In view of the above, the present appeal is allowed in terms of order dated 10.9.2024.

9. Order dated 27.8.2024 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Shrawasti in Case Crime No.139/2021, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Bhinga, District Shrawasti, is hereby set aside. Order Date :- 19.2.2025 Gaurav/- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Learned AGA informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including upto date case diary and charge sheet in this case has already been submitted. 2. Heard Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 3. This appeal has been preferred under Section 14 (A) (2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against impugned order dated 27.08.2024, passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, (SC/ST Act), Shrawasti, in case Crime No. 139/2021, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) (r), 3(1) (s) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Bhinga, District Shrawasti, whereby the bail application of the appellants/applicants has been rejected. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants has placed before this Court a copy of the charge sheet submitted by the Investigating OfÏcer in the instant case, the same is taken on record. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently submits that the appellants have falsely been implicated in this case and after lodging of the First Information Report they have cooperated with the investigation and had remained present before the Investigating OfÏcer as and when their presence was required and therefore there was neither any occasion nor any opportunity available to the Investigating OfÏcer to have arrested them and the charge sheet has been filed, however, when they moved an application for regular bail before the trial court the same has been rejected by passing impugned order. 6. It is vehemently submitted that the agony of the appellants is that they have not been arrested by the Investigating ofÏcer during investigation and by rejecting their bail application by the trial court, they have been confined in prison while an undertaking was offered that they will cooperate in the trial as they have cooperated with the investigation. The appellants are not having any criminal antecedent and are in jail in this case since 29.7.2024. 7. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that there is no illegality so far as the impugned order is concerned as the appellants have committed an heinous offence. 8. Perusal of the record would reveal that after lodging of the FIR the charge sheet has been submitted on 15.7.2021. Though it is not evident when the charge sheet has been received by the special court but it may safely be inferred that when the bail application of the appellants was disposed of by the trial court/ special court in all probability the charge sheet should have been available before the Special Court. It also appears to be an admitted situation that the appellants have not been arrested by the Investigating OfÏcer during the course of investigation and it has been canvassed before this Court that the appellants have cooperated throughout the investigation. 9. Thus, the grievance of the appellants appear to be that when they have not been arrested by the Investigating OfÏcer during the course of investigation and have cooperated in the investigating and only their presence was required before the trial court for expeditious disposal of the case, there was no occasion available before the Special Court to have rejected their bail application. 10. Having considered all the facts and circumstances as well as the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having an eye on the specific fact that the appellants were not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge sheet has been filed in penal sections punishable with less than seven years imprisonment, a case of interim bail is emerging in favour of the appellants as having regard to Section 15-A (3) of the SC/ST Act, the victim is required to be informed about the pendency of the instant proceedings. 11. Issue notice to the respondents no. 2, 3 and 4 returnable till the next date of listing. 12. Steps in this regard be taken by appellant within three working days from today. 13. List on 26.09.2024, by which date the State if so wish may also file counter afÏdavit/ objections along with the proof of service on respondents no. 2, 3 and 4. 14. In the meantime, the appellants-applicants Malikram @ Ram Kumar Verma @ Kumar Verma and Vikas Verma are released on interim bail on their furnishing personal bonds of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the special court subject to following conditions:- (i) The appellants shall not tamper with the evidence of witnesses and shall not commit any offence. (ii) The appellants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 appellants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case, the appellants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the appellants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174- A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) The appellants 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 appellants is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 15. Observations made herein-above are only for the purpose of disposal of bail application and the same shall not have any bearing on the trial of the case. 16. List as directed on 26.09.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants who were enlarged on interim bail vide aforesaid order have never misused the liberty granted by this Court and they are ready to cooperate in the trial. It is thus submitted that appellants may be enlarged on regular bail.

6. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of the appellants, but he does not dispute the fact that interim bail application of the appellants has already been allowed by this Court vide order dated 10.9.2024.

7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, contents of the appeal, bail application including the order of interim bail dated 10.9.2024, it is evident that appellants have never misused the liberty of interim bail granted by this Court.

8. In view of the above, the present appeal is allowed in terms of order dated 10.9.2024.

9. Order dated 27.8.2024 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Shrawasti in Case Crime No.139/2021, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Bhinga, District Shrawasti, is hereby set aside. Order Date :- 19.2.2025 Gaurav/- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench