Girish Kumar Maurya vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 15996 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5422 of 2022
 

 
Appellant :- Girish Kumar Maurya
 
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Bharat Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Nitesh Kumar Srivastava
 

 
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

Heard Shri Bharat Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, Shri Vinay Tripathi, Advocate holding brief of Shri Nitesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the second respondent, Shri Ravindra Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material placed 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 Girish Kumar Maurya to set aside the impugned order dated 21.07.2022, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Badaun has rejected the bail application No. 1798 of 2022 of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 223 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 326, 504, 506 I.P.C and Section 3 (2) (V) SC/ST Act registered at Police Station- Civil Line, District- Badaun.

Brief facts of the case are that the first information report dated 24.04.2022 at 21:58 hours, which was lodged against the appellant and four other named and 6 to 7 unknown persons, alleging that appellant and other co-accused persons having Lathi reached the field of the first informant and they dismantled the boundaries of the field. When the first informant and Arvind Singh reached there and objected the act of the accused persons, they committed marpeet by Lathi, Danda, Farsa and abused with caste derogatory words. The appellant assaulted by Farsa, by which the first informant sustained grievous injuries.

Medical examination of the injured person Jamuna Prasad was conducted on 24.04.2022 at 1:35 p.m. before lodging of the first information report. The first informant received incised wound of 3 cm X .5 cm X skull deep on left side of his head 9 cm above left eyebrow. Apart from this injury, two contusion, one abraded contusion and complain of pain on left ear was also found on the person of the injured. After recording the statements of the first informant and injured persons and other prosecution witnesses, charge-sheet had been submitted against the appellant and three named accused persons on 30.07.2022 and investigation is pending for three accused persons. The appellant was arrested on 18.06.2022.

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 general allegation of committing marpeet has been assigned to the appellant. It is further submitted that medical examination was conducted prior to the lodging of the first information report. It is further submitted that there is no abnormality or bony injury with regard to injury no. 1. It is further submitted that other injuries have not been assigned to the present appellant. The appellant has previous criminal history of one case, which relates to Gambling Act. The appellant is languishing in jail since 18.06.2022.

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. as well as counsel for the second respondent have supported the order passed by the Special Judge and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. They 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 first information report has been lodged against five named and 6 to 7 unknown persons;

(b) The injured persons were medically examined prior to lodging of the FIR by a Majrubi Chhithi;

(c) There is no bony injury or abnormality with regard to injury no. 1, which has been assigned to the appellant;

(d) The appellant is languishing in jail since 18.06.2022.

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 21.07.2022 is set aside.

Let appellant/applicant, Girish Kumar Maurya 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 appellant alongwith 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 :- 4.11.2022

Shafique