Anit Mishra vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 15143 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4742 of 2022
 

 
Appellant :- Anit Mishra
 
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Gaurav Tiwari,Kuldeep Kumar Gupta,Kunwar Rajan
 
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

Heard Shri Kuldeep Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Virendra Kumar Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant to set aside the impugned order dated 15.6.2022, whereby the Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 16, Allahabad has rejected the bail application No. 2445 of 2022 of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 207 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 307, 341, IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Shivkuti, District Allahabad.

Brief facts of the case are that the first information report dated 21.9.2021 has been lodged against the appellant and five other named persons stating that on 20.9.2021 at about 8.00 p.m. when he was travelling by a motorcycle to Civil Lines Bus Stand, on the way he was stopped at Teliarganj Cantt. by the appellant and other named co-accused persons, who were reached there by three motorcycles and co-accused Atul @ Khaba shot fire at him by a country made pistol, but he was narrowly escaped. Thereafter, co-accused Pappu Tiwari assaulted with a rod of gym on his head due to which he received serious injuries. Thereafter, co-accused Pappu Tiwari, Archit Shukla and the present appellant assaulted with hockey and stick on his hand and abused the first informant by using caste derogatory words.

After lodging the first information report, medical examination of the injured person was conducted on 20.9.2021. As per medical report, three injuries were found on the person of the injured. Injury No. 1 is lacerated wound 7 cm. x 0.5 cm. x muscle deep on left side of anterior part of skull and two other injuries are lacerated and contused swelling found on left elbow and right forearm. After recording the statements of the injured and other prosecution witnesses, charge sheet has been submitted against the appellant and other four named persons and on the basis of same set of allegation, named accused Archit Shukla was exonerated. The appellant was arrested on 26.4.2022.

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 role of the appellant is assigned to assault by a hockey and stick on the hand of the first informant. Role of causing injury on the head of the first informant is assigned to co-accused Pappu Tiwari. It is further submitted that the case of the present appellant is distinguishable with the co-accused Pappu Tiwari. It is further submitted that other co-accused Atul @ Khaba and Ratnesh Kumar Tripathi @ Deepu Tripathi have been granted bail by Coordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 16.5.2022 and 30.8.20202 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 577 of 2021 and 6086 of 2021 respectively. The applicant has criminal history of one case bearing case crime No. 481 of 2021, which has been lodged against the applicant and four other named persons and ten unknown persons. It is further submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 26.4.2022.

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. 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) Role of the appellant is assigned to assault by a hockey and stick on the hand of the first informant;

(b) Role of causing injury on the head of the first informant is assigned to co-accused Pappu Tiwari;

(c) Case of the present appellant is distinguishable with the co-accused Pappu Tiwari;

(d) Other co-accused Atul @ Khaba and Ratnesh Kumar Tripathi @ Deepu Tripathi have been granted bail by Coordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 16.5.2022 and 30.8.20202 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 577 of 2021 and 6086 of 2021 respectively.

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 15.6.2022 is set aside.

Let appellant/applicant, Anit Mishra 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 :- 31.10.2022

T. Sinha