Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2841 of 2021 Appellant :- Abrar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mohammad Zakir,Anil Kumar Dubey,Chandra Bhan Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant 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, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed for setting-aside the bail rejection order dated 23.12.2020 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bulandshahr in Bail Application No.4175 of 2020 (Abrar vs. State of U.P) in Case Crime No.0253 of 2020, under Sections 452, 354, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Salempur, District-Bulandshahr.
So far as the report regarding service of notice upon opposite party no.2 is concerned, the office report dated 31.82021 indicates that notices were duly served upon opposite party no.2 personally but since then they have neither engaged any counsel nor filed any counter affidavit. Under circumstances, with the help and aid of learned A.G.A. the Court is proposing to decide the appeal on merits.
Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and the matter is ripe for final submissions.
The present F.I.R. was registered by one Layak Ram under the aforementioned sections of I.P.C. and 3(2)(V) of SC/St Act against sole named accused Abrar, with the allegation that on 11.11.2020 at around 12.05 hours in the day the appellant barged into the house of the informant and started misbehaving with his daughter Miss 'X' (19 years) and when he objected and tried to stop the appellant, he started hurling abuses and has given a fire within intention to kill him. On account of providence, the informant save unscratched. After hearing the sound of fire, Tekchand and other assembled on spot and after extending threat for life, the appellant fled away from the spot.
Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that this is no injury case of Section 307 I.P.C. and at no point of time the alleged victim was ever produced before the Magistrate to record her statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C.. It is further submitted by appellant's counsel that this shame prosecution has been initiated just on account of village party bandi. There is no witness to the abuses or caste related derogatory remarks as alleged in the F.I.R. Even assuming for the sake of argument to be true on the face value, whatever version has been made, was made within the four walls of the house and not openly in public, so as to make them humiliated on account of their caste and moreover, the applicant is in jail since 12.11.2020 having no criminal antecedents.
Shri Ghanshyam Kumar, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that this is no injury case of Section 307 I.P.C. and there is no witness to the account of filthy abuses and caste related derogatory remarks.
The submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant, prima facie, appear 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, the period of detention already undergone by the appellant and also 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-Abrar, 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 APPELLANT 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 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 23.12.2020 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bulandshahr, is hereby set aside.
Order Date :- 30.9.2021 M. Kumar