Allahabad High Court
Ram Khelawan vs State Of U.P. & Anr. on 30 July, 2021
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 27
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 1179 of 2020
Appellant :- Ram Khelawan
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Anr.
Counsel for Appellant :- Anil Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Bhanu Pratap Kushwaha,Sushil Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
(C.M.A. No. 10442/2021 - Application for Condonation of Delay)
In view of the judgment of the Apex Court passed in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020 "Cognizance for Extension of Limitation Vs. xxxxx", the delay of eight days in filing the appeal is excluded. The appeal is within time.
Order on Appeal
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 14A (2) the Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to set aside the order dated 19.08.2020 passed in Bail application No. 2194/2020, arising out of case crime No. 144/2020, under Sections 366/376/504/506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Malihabad, District Lucknow.
Learned counsel for the appellant while pressing the appeal submits that, the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing as claimed by the prosecution has been committed by the appellant.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that F.I.R. has been lodged after a delay of 46 days without having any explanation. The prosecutrix has refused to undergo the medical examination which is evident from the medical report which is on record as Annexure No. 3. Age of the prosecutrix according to the school record is more than 18 years on the date of incident. The prosecutrix in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has not made any allegation of rape against the present accused-applicant, neither there is any allegation of rape in the F.I.R., however, in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. for the first time she has alleged rape against he appellant which is improvement. It is lastly contended that the prosecutrix remained on her accord and will with the applicant for a period of four days and during this period she has not raised any alarm.
It is further submitted that, the appellant is languishing in jail in this matter since 11.04.2020. Charge-sheet in the matter has already been submitted. There is no likelihood that the appellant-applicant after release on bail may flee from the process of law or will misuse the liberty of bail granted by this Court.
Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail, but could not confront the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, without commenting upon merits, I am of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. In view of above, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order dated 19.08.2020 passed in Bail application No. 2194/2020, arising out of case crime No. 144/2020, under Sections 366/376/504/506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Malihabad, District Lucknow, is set aside.
Let the appellant-applicant Ram Khelawan, involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) 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.
(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 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.
(v) 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.
(vi) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant 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.
Order Date :- 30.7.2021/R.C.
