Allahabad High Court
Karnal vs State Of U.P. And Another on 25 May, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:117846
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2312 of 2022
Appellant :- Karnal
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Avinash Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
1. Despite service of notice, no one has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose this appeal.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant; learned AGA for opposite party no.1 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 order dated 31.03.2022 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Shamli, has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 30 of 2022, under Sections 307, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Adarsh Mandi, District Shamli.
4. There is allegation against the appellant of committing the offence of attempt to murder and threatening against a person belonging to scheduled caste.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the statement of the doctor has been recorded before the trial court wherein, he has stated that the injuries suffered by the injured are simple in nature.
6. In view of the above, the implication of the appellant under Section 307 IPC is not justified. He has further submitted that the appellant has criminal history of six cases prior to the present implication in which five cases have been closed. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Saquib Abdul Hamid Vs. State of Maharastra 2014 0 Supreme (Bom) 1505 2014 0 AIIMR (Cri) 3481 wherein, it has been held in paragraph no. 23 that previously convicted convict can be granted bail in subsequent implication provided the Court satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that appellant is not guilty. This Court finds that the implication of the appellant was made for committing the offence of attempt to murder, but the possibility of conviction under the aforesaid sections appears to be bleak in view of the statement of the doctor. The appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is a case of malicious prosecution of appellant under the provisions of SC/ST Act. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 19.02.2022. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
7. 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 appellant and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the appellant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
8. It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the court below has not properly considered the facts of the case. Hence, in view of the above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the court below dated 31.03.2022 is, hereby, set aside.
9. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; appellant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
10. Let appellant, Karnal, 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 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.
(ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The appellant 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 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 the trial court.
(v) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
(vi) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
11. 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 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 in accordance with law.
12. 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 appellant, if there is no other legal impediment.
13. 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.
14. The court below is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one year.
15. The criminal appeal is allowed.
Order Date :- 25.5.2023
Abhishek
