Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5411 of 2019 Appellant :- Jakir Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Appellant :- Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ram Bahadur
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Short counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for complainant which is taken on record.
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 18.07.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Allahabad, in Bail Application No. 3672 of 2019 (Jakir Vs. State of U.P), arising out of case crime no. 1502 of 2018, under Sections 304, 504 IPC and Section 3 (2) (5) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Dhoomanganj, District- Allahabad, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Allahabad has rejected the bail applications of Lavkush Kumar Raidas, Jakir (applicant) and Umesh Kumar Gautam, by a common order.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the FIR was got registered by father of the victim through application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. after inordinate delayed of almost one month, under the aforesaid sections of I.P.C. & SC/ST Act, on 124.12.2018 against the applicant and three others named persons with the allegations that on 19.11.2018 in the night, the named accused persons have assaulted his son and abusing casts word.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that Suresh, who is driver of the Tata Pickup, is star witness of the incident. The general role of marpeet has attributed to all the four named accused persons. The statement of Suresh recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. in which he has repeated the version of FIR. It is next contended that the postmortem report shows the deceased had sustained one fatal head injury i.e. right temporal bone fractured. It is not clear that who is the author of fatal injury on the head of the deceased. General role has been assigned against all of them. There is no previous criminal history of the appellant. The appellant is languishing in jail since 01.07.2019.
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- Jakir, 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 18.07.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Allahabad, in Bail Application No. 3672 of 2019 (Jakir Vs. State of U.P), arising out of case crime no. 1502 of 2018, under Sections 304, 504 IPC and Section 3 (2) (5) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Dhoomanganj, District- Allahabad, is hereby set aside.
Order Date :- 27.11.2019 v.k.updh.