Allahabad High Court
Vijay Pal Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 9 May, 2023
Author: Siddharth
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:100149
RESERVED ON 1.5.2023
DELIVERED ON 9.5.2023
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1977 of 2023
Appellant :- Vijay Pal Singh
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Sarvesh
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ramesh Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Shri Sarvesh, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Ramesh Kumar Mishra, learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record.
Despite service of notice on opposite party no.2, as per office report dated 1.5.2023,no one has turned up to oppose the appeal.
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 1.2.2023, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Allahabad has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 136 of 2021 (S.T. No. 08 of 2023, under Sections 376D,452,323,504,506 IPC and Section 3(2) (V) SC/ST Act, Police Station Bara, District Prayagraj There is allegation in the First Information Report lodged by the informant alleging that she belongs to Adivashi community and is residing in hut in forest with her family.The appellant and co-accused Raghvendra Singh, Akhilesh Singh and Deepak Singh are influential and rich person and on 20.9.2021 when she was sleeping in her hut alone, they entered and committed offence of gang rape against her.When she raised alarm they had beaten her by legs and fists and by butt of the gun. She was also threatened on gun point. Her husband had gone to Chakghat. She had given information at the police station on next day, but First Information Report was not lodged.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that informant, Sushma Devi, has been set up by Shivam Pandey son Shyama Kant Pandey and through her falsely implicated the appellant and co-accused. She is wife of Shivam Pandey and not Sivam Kol.In the electoral role no person named Shivam Kol exists. The investigation in this case was conducted on the order passed in writ petition filed by appellant and co-accused praying for fair investigation before this court. He has submitted that after the order of this court was brought to the notice of Superintendent of Police(Rural Area),he threatened them of implication in false case. He immediately arrested co-accused, Deepak Singh on 12.12.2022.The appellant and co-accused, Raghvendra Singh were arrested without conducting fair investigation in violation of orders of Senior Officials of the police. Co-accused, Raghvendra Singh, has lodged First Information Report against Shivam Pandey and others regarding sale of stolen scrape. After implication in this case huge amount of Rs.10 lacs was demanded for compromise from the appellant and other co-accused by the Shivam Pandey. He has pointed out to the CDR details of mobile phones of all the accused persons and none of them were found together at the time of alleged incident. Subsequently informant has admitted in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.c. that her husband is not Shivam Kol but Shivam Pandey.In the medical report of the victim no sign of commission of gang rape was found. The appellant has been falsely implicated in this case.It is a case of malicious prosecution under the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 18.11.2022. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
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.
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 case of the appellant. Hence, in view of above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the court below dated 1.2.2023 is, hereby, set aside.
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.
Let appellant, Vijay Pal Singh 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.
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.
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.
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.
The criminal appeal is allowed.
Order Date :- 9.5.2023 Atul kr. sri.