Allahabad High Court
Rajkumar Madhesiya vs State Of U.P. And Another on 22 December, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:243036
Court No. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 12276 of 2023
Appellant :- Rajkumar Madhesiya
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Ajatshatru Pandey,Sarfaraz Ahmad
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
1. Compliance affidavit filed today by learned A.G.A is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Pankaj Kumar, learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record.
3. 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 judgment and order dated 19.10.2023 in First Bail Application No. 2193 of 2023 (Rajkumar Madhesiya Vs. State of U.P.) and judgement and order dated 20.11.2023 in Second Bail Application No. 2547 of 2023 (Rajkumar Madhesiya Vs. State of U.P.) passed by the court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Mau by which the bail applications of the appellant has been rejected in Case Crime No. 257 of 2023, under Sections 328, 376, 506 of IPC & Section 67 of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, and under Section 3(1)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Madhuban, District Mau and in Second Bail Application No. 2547 of 2023 (Rajkumar Madhesiya Vs. State of U.P.) under Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, District Mau.
4. There is an allegation in the F.I.R that prior to three years from the date of F.I.R, the appellant established forceful physical relations with the informant.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. No date, time or place is mentioned in the F.I.R of the alleged incident. The charge sheet has been submitted against the appellant but no such indecent photographs are recovered or taken by the Investigating Officer during investigation. During her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C, the informant had admitted that the appellant was a frequent visitor of her house and she was having conversations with him. The victim refuse to undergo for her medical examination, therefore, the allegation of rape is not corroborated with any medical evidence. There is no evidence that appellant had circulated the indecent photographs on social media or to the mobile of the husband of the victim. Appellant is languishing in jail since 29.09.2023. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant but could not dispute the aforesaid factual aspects of the matter.
7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, this Court is of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.
8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.
9. Let appellant, Rajkumar Madhesiya, involved in the above Case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.
(v) 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.
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 22.12.2023
PS
