Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5912 of 2019 Appellant :- Ankit Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Adesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Amar Jeet Upadhyay
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant today in the Court is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed for setting-aside the bail rejection order dated 28.08.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Meerut in Bail Application No.4503 of 2019 arising out of case crime no.140 of 2019 under Section 306 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Bahsuma, District-Meerut.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant's brother Raj Kashyap was facing prosecution in connection with case crime no. 205 of 2019 for the alleged act of kidnapping and rape of one Km. Anchal who is daughter of the deceased of the present case. Submission made by the counsel is that Smt. Sonia has lodged the present FIR on 05.07.2019 under Section 306 IPC against the accused applicant and three others with the allegation that they are penalizing and harassing the deceased to have compromise in the above matter in case crime no. 205 of 2019. Out of sheer frustration the deceased has hanged himself. In the entire except there is one ligature mark over her neck. There is no other mark of injury over her person. There is nothing on record to establish that the applicant was ever involved in abetting or goading the husband of the informant for committing the suicide. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.08.2019.
Learned A.G.A as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail.
The submission made by learned counsel for the applicant, 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 applicant-Ankit, 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 SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE 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.
(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicants, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this court.
Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned order dated 28.08.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Meerut, is hereby set aside.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019 Abhishek Sri.