Golu Verma v. State of U.P., in case Crime No

2. The present appeal has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 27.08.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Shravasti in Bail Application No.619 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 139 of 2021, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (Da), 3 (1)(Dha) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kotwali Bhinga, district Shravasti.

3. It is evident from the record that notice has already been served upon private respondent, however, none appears on his behalf. Therefore, the matter is being proceeded for final disposal with the assistance of learned counsel for appellant as well as the learned A.G.A.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was granted interim bail by this Court vide order dated 03.10.2024. Despite service of notice, no one has put in appearance on behalf of private respondent therefore, the appellant is entitled to regular bail. He further submits that appellant has never misused the liberty of interim bail granted by this Court and the appellant is ready to co- operate in the trial pending before the court below therefore, he is entitled to regular bail.

5. For ready reference, the interim bail granted to the appellant by this Court vide order dated 03.10.2024 is extracted here-in-under : "(Crl. Misc. Application No.2 of 2024)

1. Learned AGA informs that respondents no.2 has been duly served, however, there is no report with regard to the service on respondents no. 3 and 4. The written communication which has been placed before this Court for perusal with regard to service on respondent no.2 is taken on record. Despite service the respondent no.2 is not represented.

2. Heard Shri Arvind Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant 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 Special Judge, (SC/ST Act), Shrawasti, in Bail Application No. 619/2024, Golu Verma Vs. State of U.P., in case Crime No. 139/2021, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) (Da), 3(1) (Dha) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Bhinga, District Shrawasti, whereby the bail application of the appellant/applicant has been rejected.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has placed before this Court a copy of the charge sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer in the instant case, the same is taken on record.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in this case and after lodging of the First Information Report he has cooperated with the investigation and had remained present before the Investigating Officer as and when his presence was required and therefore there was neither any occasion nor any opportunity available to the Investigating Officer to have arrested him 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 appellant is that he has not been arrested by the Investigating officer during investigation and by rejecting their bail application by the trial court, he has been confined in prison while an undertaking was offered that he will cooperate in the trial as he has cooperated with the investigation. The appellant is not having any criminal antecedent and are in jail in this case since 29.7.2024.

7. It is further submitted that criminal history of two cases has been alleged against the applicant/ appellant, however, in one of this case the appellant has been released on bail and the bail order with regard to this has been placed at page no. 59 of the paper book and the second case with regard to Section 60 of the Excise Act is not in the knowledge of the appellant.

8. 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 has committed an heinous offence.

9. 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 appellant 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 Officer during the course of investigation and it has been canvassed before this Court that the appellant has cooperated throughout the investigation.

10. Thus, the grievance of the appellant appears to be that when he has not been arrested by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation and have cooperated in the investigating and only his 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.

11. 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 appellant was 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 appellant. Having regard to Section 15-A (3) of the SC/ST Act, the victims are required to be informed about the pendency of the instant proceedings and only opposite party no.2 has been served.

12. Thus, issue notice to the respondents no. 3 and 4 returnable till the next date of listing.

13. Steps in this regard be taken by appellant within three working days from today.

14. List on 22.10.2024, by which date the State if so wish may also file counter affidavit/ objections along with the proof of service on respondents no. 3 and 4.

14. In the meantime, the appellant-applicant- Golu Verma is released on interim bail on his 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 appellant shall not tamper with the evidence of witnesses and shall not commit any offence. (ii) The appellant 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 appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. 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 appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the appellant fails 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 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 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court 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 against him 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 22.10.2024."

6. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of appellant but does not dispute the fact that there is no evidence that the appellant has misused the liberty of interim bail granted by this Court.

7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of appeal as well as other relevant documents as well as the interim bail order dated 03.10.2024; it is evident that there is no evidence on record that the appellant has misused the liberty of interim bail granted to him. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that impugned order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside and appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

8. Resultantly, in the above facts and circumstances of the case, the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, hence, the present appeal has substance, and it is accordingly allowed in terms of order dated 03.10.2024, and the impugned order dated 27.08.2024, passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Shravasti is hereby set aside and the interim bail granted by this Court is hereby confirmed. Order Date :- 6.1.2025. Rks. RAJESH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

2. The present appeal has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 27.08.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Shravasti in Bail Application No.619 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 139 of 2021, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (Da), 3 (1)(Dha) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kotwali Bhinga, district Shravasti.

3. It is evident from the record that notice has already been served upon private respondent, however, none appears on his behalf. Therefore, the matter is being proceeded for final disposal with the assistance of learned counsel for appellant as well as the learned A.G.A.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was granted interim bail by this Court vide order dated 03.10.2024. Despite service of notice, no one has put in appearance on behalf of private respondent therefore, the appellant is entitled to regular bail. He further submits that appellant has never misused the liberty of interim bail granted by this Court and the appellant is ready to co- operate in the trial pending before the court below therefore, he is entitled to regular bail.

5. For ready reference, the interim bail granted to the appellant by this Court vide order dated 03.10.2024 is extracted here-in-under : "(Crl. Misc. Application No.2 of 2024)

1. Learned AGA informs that respondents no.2 has been duly served, however, there is no report with regard to the service on respondents no. 3 and 4. The written communication which has been placed before this Court for perusal with regard to service on respondent no.2 is taken on record. Despite service the respondent no.2 is not represented.

2. Heard Shri Arvind Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant 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 Special Judge, (SC/ST Act), Shrawasti, in Bail Application No. 619/2024, Golu Verma Vs. State of U.P., in case Crime No. 139/2021, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) (Da), 3(1) (Dha) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Bhinga, District Shrawasti, whereby the bail application of the appellant/applicant has been rejected.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has placed before this Court a copy of the charge sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer in the instant case, the same is taken on record.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in this case and after lodging of the First Information Report he has cooperated with the investigation and had remained present before the Investigating Officer as and when his presence was required and therefore there was neither any occasion nor any opportunity available to the Investigating Officer to have arrested him 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 appellant is that he has not been arrested by the Investigating officer during investigation and by rejecting their bail application by the trial court, he has been confined in prison while an undertaking was offered that he will cooperate in the trial as he has cooperated with the investigation. The appellant is not having any criminal antecedent and are in jail in this case since 29.7.2024.

7. It is further submitted that criminal history of two cases has been alleged against the applicant/ appellant, however, in one of this case the appellant has been released on bail and the bail order with regard to this has been placed at page no. 59 of the paper book and the second case with regard to Section 60 of the Excise Act is not in the knowledge of the appellant.

8. 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 has committed an heinous offence.

9. 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 appellant 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 Officer during the course of investigation and it has been canvassed before this Court that the appellant has cooperated throughout the investigation.

10. Thus, the grievance of the appellant appears to be that when he has not been arrested by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation and have cooperated in the investigating and only his 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.

11. 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 appellant was 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 appellant. Having regard to Section 15-A (3) of the SC/ST Act, the victims are required to be informed about the pendency of the instant proceedings and only opposite party no.2 has been served.

12. Thus, issue notice to the respondents no. 3 and 4 returnable till the next date of listing.

13. Steps in this regard be taken by appellant within three working days from today.

14. List on 22.10.2024, by which date the State if so wish may also file counter affidavit/ objections along with the proof of service on respondents no. 3 and 4.

14. In the meantime, the appellant-applicant- Golu Verma is released on interim bail on his 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 appellant shall not tamper with the evidence of witnesses and shall not commit any offence. (ii) The appellant 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 appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. 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 appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the appellant fails 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 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 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court 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 against him 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 22.10.2024."

6. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of appellant but does not dispute the fact that there is no evidence that the appellant has misused the liberty of interim bail granted by this Court.

7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of appeal as well as other relevant documents as well as the interim bail order dated 03.10.2024; it is evident that there is no evidence on record that the appellant has misused the liberty of interim bail granted to him. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that impugned order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside and appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

8. Resultantly, in the above facts and circumstances of the case, the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, hence, the present appeal has substance, and it is accordingly allowed in terms of order dated 03.10.2024, and the impugned order dated 27.08.2024, passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Shravasti is hereby set aside and the interim bail granted by this Court is hereby confirmed. Order Date :- 6.1.2025. Rks. RAJESH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench