Allahabad High Court
Raghvendra Singh Yadav vs State Of U.P. And Another on 3 June, 2024
Author: Ajay Bhanot
Bench: Ajay Bhanot
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:100943
Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2650 of 2024
Appellant :- Raghvendra Singh Yadav
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Amit Daga,Pranshu Dwivedi,Ram Prakash Dwivedi
Counsel for Respondent :- Ajay Dubey,G.A.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Shri Shravan Kumar Dubey, learned AGA on the basis of instructions submits that the notices upon the respondents have been served in light of the judgment rendered by this Court in Ajeet Chaudhary vs. State of U.P. & Another reported at 2021 (1) ADJ 559.
This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 13.02.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Agra in Case Crime No. 223 of 2023, under Sections 376(2)(A), 306, 366 and 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Chhatta District Agra. The applicant-appellant is in jail since 01.01.2024.
The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 13.02.2024.
The following arguments made by Shri Amit Daga, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Ajay Dubey, learned counsel for the informant and Shri Shravan Kumar Dubey, learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:
1. The victim and the applicant were intimate and had consensual physical relations.
2. The relationship between the two could not culminate into marriage due to opposition of the victim's family.
3. The victim became depressed on account of the failure of the aforesaid relationship.
4. On the fateful day she succumbed to depression and took the extreme step of ending her life. She committed suicide by hanging.
5. The post mortem report opines that the cause of death is asphyxia due to antemortem hanging.
6. Injuries depicted in the post mortem report consistent with hanging are:
(i). Nature of ligature mark.
(ii). No abnormality was detected in the hyoid bone.
7. The applicant did not abet or instigate the deceased to commit suicide.
8. Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence.
9. The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.
In the light of the preceding discussion, facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the nature of the offence and evidence the appellant has made out a case for bail. The trial court erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order dated 13.02.2024 suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set aside and the appeal is to be allowed.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set aside.
Let the appellant-Raghvendra Singh Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.
(ii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
The learned trial court is directed to fix the sureties after due application of mind in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Arvind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. (Application U/S 482 No.2613 of 2023).
The learned trial court shall ensure that the right of bail of the applicant granted by this Court is not frustrated by arbitrary demands of sureties, or onerous conditions which are unrelated to the socioeconomic status of the applicant.
Order Date :- 3.6.2024
Vandit
