Allahabad High Court
Anshuman Singh @ Shubham Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 13 December, 2022
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 156 of 2022 Appellant :- Anshuman Singh @ Shubham Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vineet Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.
(C.M. Delay Condonation Application No.1 of 2022) Heard Sri Vineet Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Arvind Kumar Gupta, learned A.G.A. for the State.
Having heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the averments made in the application seeking condonation of delay, this Court is satisfied that the delay of three days in filing the instant appeal has sufficiently been explained.
Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay is allowed and the delay in preferring the instant criminal appeal is hereby condoned.
(Order on appeal) Heard Sri Vineet Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Arvind Kumar Gupta, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
According to office report dated 23.09.2022, the notice upon the opposite party no.2 has been served personally. However, no one has appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 to argue this appeal.
This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred against the order dated 02.05.2022 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act/Additional District and Session Judge, Court No.2, Unnao, arising out of Case Crime No.0129 of 2021, under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 3(2)5A, Police Station Beeghapur, District Unnao.
Learned counsel for appellant has submitted that the innocent appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case. His further submission is that in fact the applicant had prior acquaintance with the opposite party no.2, however, he never promised to procure any job for anyone and it was routine commercial transactions between the applicant and opposite party no.2/first informant, which was given criminal color so as to falsely implicate the applicant in criminal case.
Learned counsel for the appellant has very fairly submitted that the applicant was always willing and still willing to return the amount, received by him, to the first informant/opposite party no.2.
Learned counsel for the appellant has also submitted that in case, the appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall also fully cooperate with the trial court in getting the trial concluded expeditiously. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case. His further submission is that the appellant has criminal history of one case, which is trivial in nature and have no adverse societal impact. The aforesaid criminal history of the appellant has been explained in paragraph no.10 of the instant appeal. The appellant is languishing in jail since 15.03.2022.
Per contra, Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and have submitted that the appellant has lured the first informant/opposite party no.2 and has extracted an amount to the tune of Rs.1,45,000/-. However, he could not dispute the other factual submission advanced by learned counsel for the appellant.
Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record, it transpires that the first information report came to be lodged by the first informant on 03.08.2021 at 16:00 Hours. However, this alleged incident occurred during 20.12.2019 to January, 2020. Therefore, the first information came to be lodged after inordinate and unexplained delay in a situation when the sole accused-appellant was known to the first informant/opposite party no.2. The appellant has criminal history of one case, which has been explained in paragraph no.10 of the instant appeal. The appellant is languishing in jail since 15.03.2022.
Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, without expressing any view on the merit of the present case, this Court is of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. The order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order dated 02.05.2022 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act/Additional District and Session Judge, Court No.2, Unnao, arising out of Case Crime No.0129 of 2021, under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 3(2)5A, Police Station Beeghapur, District Unnao is set aside.
Let the appellant, Anshuman Singh @ Shubham Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number with the following conditions:-
(i) The appellant shall furnish a personal bond with two sureties each of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
(ii) The appellant shall appear and strictly comply following terms of bond executed under section 437 sub section 3 of Chapter- 33 of Cr.P.C.:-
(a) The appellant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed under this Chapter.
(b) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected, and
(c) 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.
(iii) The appellant shall cooperate with investigation /trial.
(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 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.
(v) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(vi) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial, in order to secure his presence, proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the 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.
(vii) The appellant shall remain present, 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 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.
(viii) The appellant as undertaken, shall deposit a sum of Rs.1,45,000/- within six weeks from the date of his release from the jail with the learned Court below concerned. Thereafter, the learned trial Court shall hand over the same to the first informant/opposite party no.2 without requiring her/his to file any surety or security for the same.
The trial Court is also directed to expedite the trial of the aforesaid case by following the provisions contained in Section 309 Cr.P.C., strictly without granting any unnecessary adjournments to the parties, in case there is no other legal impediment.
Order Date :- 13.12.2022 A.Dewal