Surendra Maurya vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 18255 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 15
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1904 of 2022
 

 
Appellant :- Surendra Maurya
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Vaibhav Mishra,Tribhuvan Srivastava
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

Heard Sri Tribhuvan Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Alok Saran, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 20.07.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge (S.C./ S.T. Act)/ Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Unnao in Bail Application No.2031 of 2022 (Surendra Maurya vs. State of U.P) arising out of F.I.R./ Case Crime No.0247 of 2022, under Sections 143, 147, 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5a S.C./ S.T. Act, Police Station Hasanganj, District Unnao, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected.

Vide order dated 17.08.2022, notices were directed to be issued to respondents No.2 and 3, which have been served upon them as is evident from annexure No.C.A.-1 annexed to the counter affidavit dated 04.11.2022 filed by the State. However, no one has put in appearance on behalf of respondents No.2 and 3.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that a false first information report came to be lodged by the complainant, Smt. Maya against two named accused persons, namely, Surendra Maurya, the appellant herein and Ravi Singh and three unknown persons stating therein that on 08.07.2022 at about 10:00 PM, the two named accused persons, namely, Surendra Maurya and Ravi Singh and three other accused persons entered into the grove of the first informant. The accused persons hurled casteist slur and assaulted husband of the first informant by the wooden sticks. The accused/ appellant Surendra Maurya also tried to strangulate the husband of the first informant. The accused, Ravi Singh assaulted the husband of the first informant by wooden rode causing fracture of his ribs.

His further submission is that the accused/ appellant has been falsely implicated due to prior enmity. The injuries noted by the Medical Officer are contusion/ swelling and complaint of pain only. The injuries No.1 and 8, which were kept under observation and were advised to be X-rayed, have not yielded any report indicating fracture or any abnormality in the bone. He has also submitted that this fact itself belies the prosecution story that the husband of the first informant was so assaulted which caused fracture of ribs of the husband of the first informant. The accused/ appellant is languishing in jail since 10.07.2022 who has no previous criminal history.

His further submission is that in case, the appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall also fully cooperate with the trial court in getting the trial concluded expeditiously. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer by submitting that the accused/ appellant is named in the first information report. During investigation of this matter, sufficient evidence was collected against him which led to filing of charge sheet against the named appellant for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5a S.C./ S.T. Act which are serious in nature. Therefore, the appellant is not entitled to get any indulgence of this Court in granting liberty of bail to him at this stage.

Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record, it transpires that the first information report came to be lodged on 09.07.2022 in respect of an incident which is said to have occurred on 08.07.2022. The injury report reveals that all the injuries were contusion/ swelling and complaint of pain. Injuries No.1 and 8, which were kept under observation and were advised to the X-rayed also, have not yielded any report leading or indicating fracture. The accused/ appellant is languishing in jail since 10.07.2022 who has no previous criminal history.

Considering the aforesaid overall facts and circumstance of the case, without commenting upon merits, this Court of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. The order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned judgment and order dated 20.07.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge (S.C./ S.T. Act)/ Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Unnao in Bail Application No.2031 of 2022 (Surendra Maurya vs. State of U.P) arising out of F.I.R./ Case Crime No.0247 of 2022, under Sections 143, 147, 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5a S.C./ S.T. Act, Police Station Hasanganj, District Unnao, is, hereby, set aside.

Let the appellant, Surendra Maurya be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number with the following conditions:-

(i) The appellant shall furnish a personal bond with two sureties each of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

(ii) The appellant shall appear and strictly comply following terms of bond executed under section 437 sub section 3 of Chapter- 33 of Cr.P.C.:-

(a) The appellant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed under this Chapter.

(b) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected, and

(c) 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.

(iii) The appellant shall cooperate with investigation /trial.

(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, 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, in order to secure his 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.

(vii) The appellant shall remain present, 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.

(viii) The trial court is also directed to expedite the trial of the aforesaid case by following the provisions of Section 309 I.P.C., strictly without granting any unnecessary adjournments to the parties, in case there is no other legal impediment.

(Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J.)

Order Date :- 22.11.2022

cks/-