Allahabad High Court
Nitin Alias Jatin Alias Jeetu vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko ... on 19 July, 2023
Author: Shamim Ahmed
Bench: Shamim Ahmed
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:47282 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1764 of 2023 Appellant :- Nitin Alias Jatin Alias Jeetu Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vishnu Pandey,Jitendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred against the order dated 21.10.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Bail Application No.9415 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No.367 of 2022, under Sections 307, 325, 341, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3 (2) V SC/ ST Act, Police Station Para, District Lucknow, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
In spite of service of notice upon opposite party no.2 vide office report dated 14.07.2023, no counter affidavit has been filed nor any counsel has appeared on her behalf, as such, it appears that she is not interested to contest this case.
Learned A.G.A. for the State has also not filed counter affidavit in this case. As the matter pertains to bail of the appellant, therefore, this Court has no option but to proceed further.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that innocent appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. His further submission is that initially a false first information report came to be lodged against six named accused persons including the present appellant and some unknown accused persons under Sections 147, 308 I.P.C. and 3(1)(da) & 3(1)(dha) SC/ST Act. Upon conclusion of investigation, a charge sheet came to be submitted against present appellant under Sections 307, 325, 341, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3 (2) V SC/ ST Act. His further submission is that there are vague and general allegations against all the accused persons including the present appellant who are stated to have assaulted the victim. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession or pointing out of the present appellant.
It is also submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that similarly placed co-accused, namely, Abhijit @ Chhotu, who also belongs to SC/ST community, therefore, no offence under SC/ST Act is made out against him, has already been granted bail coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.05.2023, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.13384 of 2022. It is next submitted that co-accused Ashutosh Bhardwaj @ Ramu and Jitendra Singh @ Rajat Patel, upon whom offence under the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act was imposed, have also been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 16.05.2023 and 18.05.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal No.994 of 2023 and 2916 of 2022 respectively.
Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the appellant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the appellant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It has also been pointed out that the accused is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 06.10.2022 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail, however, he is unable to dispute the contentions raised by learned counsel for the appellant.
After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also in the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and also on the ground of parity, 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. Consequently, the impugned judgment and order dated 21.10.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Bail Application No.9415 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No.367 of 2022, under Sections 307, 325, 341, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3 (2) V SC/ ST Act, Police Station Para, District Lucknow is hereby set aside and reversed.
Let the appellant, Nitin Alias Jatin Alias Jeetu be released on bail in the Case Crime No.367 of 2022, under Sections 307, 325, 341, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3 (2) V SC/ ST Act, Police Station Para, District Lucknow 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 trial court is also directed to expedite the trial of the aforesaid case by following the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C., strictly without granting any unnecessary adjournments to the parties, in case there is no other legal impediment.
Order Date :- 19.7.2023 Saurabh