Allahabad High Court
Rinku Yadav @ Santosh Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, ... on 20 October, 2022
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2009 of 2022 Appellant :- Rinku Yadav @ Santosh Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Shobh Nath Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Tauqueer Alam Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.
Heard Sri Shobh Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Tauqueer Alam, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, Sri S. N. Goswami, 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 06.08.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Faizabad/Ayodhya in bail application No.1234/2022 "Rinku Yadav @ Santosh Yadav vs. State of U.P." arising out of Case Crime No.328 of 2021, under Sections 504 & 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3 (2)(va) SC/ ST Act, Police Station Maharajganj, District Faizabad/Ayodhya whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the innocent appellant has been falsely implicated in this case because of acquaintance of co-accused, Pintu Yadav @ Abhishek Yadav against whom there are specific allegation of committing rape. His further submission is that it is decipherable from the recital made in the first information report that the the case of the present applicant falls under Section 506 I.P.C. only. His further submission is that the fact that the present applicant is said to have made some objectionable video clip of the victim was not substantiate as no evidence to that effect could be collected during investigation. His further submission is that the co-accused, Pintu Yadav @ Abhishek Yadav, against whom there are specific allegation of committing rape, has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.10.2022, passed in Criminal Appeal No.155 of 2022, hence the case of the present appellant stands on better footing.
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. The accused/appellant is languishing in jail since 06.08.2022 who has no previous criminal history.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for opposite party no.2 have vehemently opposed the prayer by submitting that the present appellant is named in the first information report, who has committed henious office of rape along with the co-accused, Pintu Yadav @ Abhishek Yadav. However, he could not dispute the fact that the co-accused, Pintu Yadav @ Abhishek Yadav against whom there are specific allegation of committing rape, has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.10.2022, passed in Criminal Appeal No.155 of 2022.
Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record, it transpires that initially the first information report was lodged against Pintu Yadav, Mulayam Yadav and Rinku Yadav, present appellant. However, upon conclusion of the investigation, the charge sheet came to be filed against the present appellant and the co-accused, Pintu Yadav @ Abhishek Yadav against whom there are specific allegation of committing rape, has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.10.2022, passed in Criminal Appeal No.155 of 2022. There was no allegation of committing rape against the present appellant. The present appellant has no criminal antecedents.
Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, without commenting upon merits, 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 06.08.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Faizabad/Ayodhya in bail application No.1234/2022 "Rinku Yadav @ Santosh Yadav vs. State of U.P." arising out of Case Crime No.328 of 2021, under Sections 504 & 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3 (2)(va) SC/ ST Act, Police Station Maharajganj, District Faizabad/Ayodhya is set aside.
Let the appellant, Rinku Yadav @ Santosh Yadav 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.
Order Date :- 20.10.2022 A.Dewal