Allahabad High Court
Prabhakar Rai vs State Of U.P. & Anr. on 23 March, 2021
Author: Saroj Yadav
Bench: Saroj Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 32 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1011 of 2020 Appellant :- Prabhakar Rai Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Amitabh Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
1. Heard counsel for the accused/appellant and learned A.G.A.
2. None turned up for respondent no.2 despite service of notice.
3. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, has been filed by the accused/appellant against the impugned order dated 22.9.2020 passed by Special Judge, SC & ST Act, Sultanpur by which Bail Application No.1290 of 2020 arising out of Crime No.48 of 2020, under Sections 376-D, 323, 504, 506, 352 I.P.C and Sections 3(1) (Da), 3(1) (Dha) and 3(1) (w) (1) of SC of SC & ST Act, Police Station Dhammaur, District Sultanpur was rejected.
4. Learned counsel for the accused/appellant argued that the allegations against the accused persons are false and the accused appellant has falsely been implicated in the crime. The accused persons were playing ciricket and some altercations took place between the prosecutrix and the boys when cricket ball went into the sahan of prosecutrix/respondent no.2. and when a boy aged about 14 years went to pick up the ball, quarreling started between the prosecutrix and other boys playing cricket. Some heated arguments took place amongst the prosecutrix and other boys while playing cricket. The F.I.R. has been lodged after 13 days. The explanation given in the F.I.R. for not lodging the F.I.R. promptly is not reasonable because in the F.I.R. itself, it has been mentioned that on the same day during day time complainant dialed Number- 112 for calling police. While on this occasion, that was not done. Accused appellant is in jail since 8.7.2020. Hence, accused appellant may be enlarged on bail.
5. Contrary to it, learned A.G.A. opposing bail application submitted that the prosecutrix in F.I.R. and in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has supported the version of the F.I.R. Hence the accused appellant should not be enlarged on bail.
6. Considered the rival submissions and perused the record.
7. The incident, according to the F.I.R., took place on 3.3.2020 and F.I.R. was lodged on 16.3.2020. No doubt in such matters, delay is considered immaterial if properly explained. In the present matter, in the F.I.R. itself, it has been written that on the date of incident, during the day when the accused persons tried to commit offence, the complainant dialed Number -112 and the police reached at the spot. Considering this fact, the delay in lodging the F.I.R. is not justifiable because the reason given in the F.I.R. is that she could not reach the police station because the accused persons did not let her go to the police station.
8. Considering all facts and circumstances of the case without commenting on the merits, it appears just to enlarge the accused /appellant on bail.
9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.
Impugned order dated 22.9.2020 passed by Special Judge, SC & ST Act, Sultanpur on Bail Application No.1290 of 2020 arising out of Crime No.48 of 2020, under Sections 376-D, 323, 504, 506, 352 I.P.C and Sections 3(1) (Da), 3(1) (Dha) and 3(1) (w) (1) of SC of SC & ST Act, Police Station Dhammaur, District Sultanpur, is set aside.
10. Let the accused/appellant (Prabhakar Rai ) be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-
(i) The accused/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 court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) The accused/appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the accused/appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the accused/appellant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The accused/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 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the accused/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 against him in accordance with law.
(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vii) 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 :- 23.3.2021 Shukla