Amit Kumar Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 22426 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5259 of 2022
 

 
Appellant :- Amit Kumar Singh
 
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Amit Kumar Singh,Satyendra Narayan Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ravindra Prakash Srivastava
 

 
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

Heard Shri Amit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Pradeep Kumar Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the second respondent, Shri R.P. Singh, 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 has been filed by the appellant, Amit Kumar Singh to set aside the impugned order dated 08.07.02022, whereby the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Sant Kabir Nagar has rejected the bail application No. 780 of 2022 of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 239 of 2022, under Sections 376(2) Dha, 312, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) and 3(1)(dha) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Khalilabad, District Sant Kabir Nagar.

Brief facts of the case are that on the basis of written information of the victim, first information report dated 22.04.2022 was lodged by the victim against the appellant and two other named accused persons under sections 376(2)Dha, 312, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) and 3(1)(dha) of SC/ST Act alleging therein that the appellant raped her and after rape, the appellant had been absconding but no action was taken to arrest the appellant due to which, victim had not been permitted to go out from her house. Victim has recorded the call of the Gram Pradhan threatening her to kill as well as abusing her with caste derogatory words.

After lodging the first information report, statement of the victim under Section 161, Cr.P.C. was recorded on 22.04.2022. Medical examination of the victim was conducted on 23.04.2022. Statement of the victim under Section 164, Cr.P.C. was recorded on 25.04.2022. After recording the statements of the other prosecution witnesses, charge sheet had been submitted against the appellant on 21.05.2022. The Investigating Officer exonerated two other named accused persons. The appellant was arrested on 03.05.2022.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the victim was consenting party and consent of the victim is not immediate result of false promise of marriage. It is further submitted that as per statement of the victim under section 161 Cr.P.C.,wherein, she stated that she was known to the appellant for five years and the appellant made physical relation with her on the pretext of false promise of marriage due to which, she became pregnant in the month of March, 2022. When she apprised the appellant about her pregnancy then he gave her medicine and told her to take and assured to marry her. After consumption of medicine, the appellant stopped talking her.

It is further submitted that the victim is the consenting party. It is further submitted that consent of the victim is not immediate result of false promise of marriage. It is further submitted that as per statement of the victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C., wherein she stated that she was known to the appellant for two years while she had gone to defecate. It is further submitted that there are material contradiction/ improvement in the statements of the victim recorded under section 161 and 164 Cr;P.C.

It is further submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 03.05.2022. The appellant has no criminal history.

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

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the applicant is released on bail, he 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 major at the time of the lodging of the FIR;

(b) there is material contradiction/improvement between the statements of the victim recorded under Section 161 & 164, Cr.P.C. It would not be appropriate to discuss the same at this stage;

(c) appellant is languishing in jail since 03.05.2022.

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 20.4.2022 is set aside.

Let appellant/applicant, Amit Kumar Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his 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 applicant 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 applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) 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 of Cr.P.C.

(iv) 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 the trial court.

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

(vi) The applicant 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 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 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 applicant, 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 :- 22.12.2022

aks