Allahabad High Court
Harendra Singh vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 4 December, 2019
Author: Rahul Chaturvedi
Bench: Rahul Chaturvedi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5388 of 2019 Appellant :- Harendra Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Pramod Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sonu Kumar Tiwari Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of appellant which is taken on record.
Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 has clearly stated that opposite party no. 2 has not turned up to file any counter affidavit.
In absence of counter affidavit and with the help of learned AGA, the appeal is being decided.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed for setting-aside the bail rejection order dated 09.07.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST ActAligarh, in Bail Application No. 2637 of 2019 (Harendra Singh Vs. State of U.P), arising out of case crime no. 148 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 466, 468, 469, 471 IPC and Section 3 (2) (5) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Tappal, District- Aligarh.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the FIR was got registered by father of the victim on 20.03.2019, under sections 363, 366 IPC and Section 3 (2) (Va) SC/ST Act against the appellant and three other named persons with the allegations that the age of the girl is 16 years and she was enticed away by the appellant on motorcycle. Both of them were in relationship with each other. While going away to her house the girl has taken away a sum of Rs. 10,000/-, her High School Certificate, Cast Certificate, SBI Pass-book, a golden ring and one silver pajeb.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the girl was eventually recovered and her statements under section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. were recorded in which she has stated that she lived with the company of the appellant for about three months and she has declined her medical examination. It appears that she is consenting party. The appellant is languishing in jail since 27.09.2016.
Learned A.G.A and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail and could not dispute the aforementioned facts.
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 appellant has made out a case for bail.
Let the appellant- Harendra 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) THE APPELLANT 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 APPELLANT 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 APPELLANT 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 APPELLANT 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 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 IPC.
(v) THE APPELLANT 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 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.
However, it is made clear that any willful 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 09.07.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act Aligarh, is hereby set aside.
Order Date :- 4.12.2019 v.k.updh.