Allahabad High Court
Arjun @ Ghantura vs State Of U.P. And Another on 7 January, 2020
Author: Rahul Chaturvedi
Bench: Rahul Chaturvedi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5267 of 2019 Appellant :- Arjun @ Ghantura Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Binod Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sunil Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Supplementary as well as rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the appellant today in the Court is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed for setting-aside the order dated 24.07.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Etah in case crime no.213 of 2019 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 304 IPC and Section 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District-Etah.
Submission made by learned counsel for the appellant is that the FIR was got registered by the brother of the deceased on 26.05.2019 for the incident said to have taken place on 24.05.2019 under sections 323, 504, 506 IPC against Raju and Sarvesh with the allegation that both of them assaulted upon the deceased by lathi and danda. This FIR came into existence by the informant on the story narrated by the injured himself. The injured has clearly attributed the role upon Sarvesh and Raju only. On account of ante mortem injuries, deceased took his last breath on 27.05.2019 and the post mortem report reveals that tracheotomy was done on the injured. Besides this, there is a small abrasion on the right eye of the injured. The doctor has opined that he died on account of ante mortem injuries. After his demise on 27.05.2019, an application was given by the first informant to S.H.O. Kotwali, Etah whereby for the first time, name of the appellant figured up and the role attributed to him is of hurling filthy abuses. The appellant is languishing in jail since 03.07.2019.
Learned A.G.A as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposed the prayer for bail.
The submission made by learned counsel for the appellant, prima facie, is quite appealing and convincing for the purpose of bail only.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the appellant-Arjun @ Ghantura, 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) THE APPLICANT WOULD FULLY COOPERATE IN THE CONCLUSION OF TRIAL WITHIN ONE YEAR AND ANY TEMPERING OR WILLING TACTICS ON THE PART OF THE APPLICANT TO DELAY THE TRIAL WOULD WARRANT THE AUTOMATIC CANCELLATION OF BAIL.
(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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.
(iii) THE APPLICANT 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 IPC.
(iv) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSE THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT 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 IPC.
(v) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION OF THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPLICANT 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.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the appellant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this court.
Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned order dated 24.07.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Etah is hereby set aside.
Order Date :- 7.1.2020 Sumit S