Mulayam Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 20024 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 999 of 2022
 

 
Appellant :- Mulayam Singh And Another
 
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Santosh Kumar Nigam,Shikhar Awasthi
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Muneesh Raghuvanshi
 

 
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

Counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the second respondent is taken on record.

Heard Sri Shikhar Awasthi, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Muneesh Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and Sri Om Prakash Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short SC/ST Act) has been preferred by the appellants Mulayam Singh and Amol Singh to set aside the impugned order dated 1.2.2022 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Fatehpur in Bail Application No. 171 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 377 of 2015 (Special Trial No. 118 of 2019), under Sections 323, 504,, 506, 452, 354B, 376(D)/511 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Bindki, District Fatehpur, by which bail application of the appellants have been rejected.

Brief facts of the case are that the first information report dated 6.10.2015 was lodged by the victim against the appellants and two other named persons on the basis of an application filed under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 13.4.2015 stating that on the same day at 6:00 P.M. when the first informant was present at the door of her house, the appellant and other co-accused persons came after taking wine and molested her and abused her with caste derogatory words and after dragging they took her into the house and attempted to commit rape with her. On her crying, sister-in-law Sapna, Arti and mother Lalli Devi reached at the spot and saved the victim. During scuffle, they committed marpeet by country made pistol as well as by kicks and fists and after that they run away after threatening with dire consequences. The concerned police has not lodged her report in respect of this incident, but registered an NCR No. 60 of 2015 under Sections 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. against other accused Ram Swaroop, who is cousin of the victim.

After lodging of the first information report, medical examination of the victim was conducted on 14.4.2015. Statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 18.10.2015.

After completing the investigation, final report of the present case had been submitted on 14.4.2015. On protest petition, concerned Magistrate summoned the present appellants and other co-accused persons. The appellant nos.1 and 2 surrendered on 8.1.2022 and 11.1.2022 respectively.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that as per first information report, the incident was taken place at the door of the house of the victim at 6:00 P.M on 13.4.2015. It is further submitted that application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. had been filed by the victim after six days of the incident. As per prosecution case, one NCR had been lodged against cousin of the victim. It is further submitted that as per medical report of the victim dated 14.4.2015, seven injuries were found on the body of the victim. One injury is related to lacerated wound on parietal region, one injury is related to contusion, two injuries are related to abrasion and swelling and other injuries are on various parts of the body of the victim, which are on non-vital part. It is further submitted that statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has not been recorded. It is further submitted that the appellant no.1 and 2 are languishing in jail since 8.1.2022 and 11.1.2022 respectively having no criminal history.

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellants of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the appellants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for respondent no.2 have supported the order passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act) and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicants. But, they could not point out any material to the contrary. They further submit that in case the applicants are released on bail, they will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

After considering the facts of the present case, it prima facie appears that;

(a) The victim was separated lady and was major at the time of incident;

(b) One NCR was lodged by the victim against cousin of the victim;

(c) As per medical report of the victim, 7 injuries were found on the body of the victim, which are on non-vital part.

(d) Appellant nos.1 and 2 are languishing in jail since 8.1.2022 and 11.1.2022 respectively and they have no criminal history.

It is a settled law that while granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of the evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, his role and involvement in the offence, his involvement in other cases and reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with.

Taking into account the totality of facts and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors., v. Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh & Ors., (2002) 3 SCC 598, Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee & Anr., (2010) 14 SCC 496 and Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar & Anr., (2020) 2 SCC 118, the larger interest of the public/State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the present criminal appeal is allowed and impugned order dated 1.2.2022 is set aside.

Let appellants/applicants Mulayam Singh and Amol Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their 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 applicants 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 applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The applicants 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 applicants 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 the trial court.

(v) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel.

(vi) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 applicants, 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 party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked;

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

Order Date :- 6.12.2022

CS/-