Allahabad High Court
Kuldeep vs State Of U.P. on 12 April, 2023
Bench: Ram Manohar Mishra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8384 of 2022
Appellant :- Kuldeep
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Ram Sharan Singh,Pushpendra Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.
Heard Shri Pushpendra Singh, and Sri Jitendra Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ram Saran Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Despite service of notice upon respondent no. 2, no one has appeared on his behalf.
The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant Kuldeep to set aside the impugned order dated 20.04.2022 whereby the Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Mahoba has rejected the bail application No. 52 of 2022 of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 87 of 2022, under Sections 323, 324, 307, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(da), (dha), 3(2)(va), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Charkhari, District- Mahoba.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to previous dispute and ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the first information report dated 23.03.2022 was registered against the appellant in which date and time of incident is mentioned as 23.3.2022 at 3:00 hours. The F.I.R. was registered against present appellant and co-accused Ravi in which it is stated that present appellant was armed with lathi (club) and Ravi was armed with axe. Role of assaulting the injured Janki Prasad is also assigned to two unknown persons. Co-accused Ravi who was armed with axe at the time of incident has already been released on bail in Crl. Appeal No. 4488 of 2022 vide order dated 6.12.2022 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. As per medical report of the injured, three incised wound and out contusion were found by the doctor at the time of his medico legal examination dated 23.3.2022 at C.H.C., Charkhari. Out of seven injuries, only one injury i.e. incised wound of6.0 cm x 2.0 cm on muscle deep on (Rt.) parietal bone, has been found on vital part of the body. These injury along with injury no. 3, 5 and 6 were found simple in medical report. Injury no. 2, 4 and 7 were kept under observation and referred for X-ray, however, in X-ray report fracture in glecolated hip bone (feemer bone), has been found which goes to the extent of Section 325 IPC only. It is further submitted that appellant is in jail since 29.3.2022. Criminal history of five cases of the appellant has been explained in paragraph no. 12 of the affidavit to criminal appeal, out of which four cases are of NCR and in one case i.e. case crime no. 324 of 2020, under Sections 323, 352, 452, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Chakhari, District Mahoba. He has received no notice from investigating officer.
It is further submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 29.3.2022. 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 Special Judge 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 appellant has assigned the role of committing marpit by axe.
(b) As per medical report of the injured except two injuries of incised wound which were found on muscle deep and other injuries were found on the non vital part of the injured person which are contusions.
(c) The appellant is languishing in jail since 29.3.2022.
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 20.04.2022 is set aside.
Let appellant/applicant, Kuldeep 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.
Order Date :- 12.4.2023/A.P. Pandey
