Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2528 of 2018 Appellant :- Manish Kumar Singh And 2 Ors.
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Appellant :- Manish Tiwary,Ashwini Kumar Awasthi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Notice on opposite party no. 2-Pinki has been served personally on 29.6.2018, but no one is present on behalf of the complainant.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State, and perused the record.
This criminal appeal has been filed against order dated 20.4.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Varanasi in Case Crime No.147 of 2016, under Sections 147, 452, 323, 504, 506, 354B IPC and Section 3(1) (10), 3(1)(Dh) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Rohaniya, District- Varanasi whereby bail application of appellant was rejected.
According to the prosecution case F.I.R. was lodged against five accused persons, namely, Manish Singh, Shani Singh, Ajit Singh @ Dumman, Raju Singh and Tilak Kumar Singh on 31.3.2016 after three months of the incident alleging that on 24.12.2015 they assaulted the first informant with intent to outrage her modesty and they also assaulted to her husband. Both received injuries but the injuries were found simple in nature.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellants are languishing in jail since 20.4.2018 (more than three months); having no criminal history; they have been falsely implicated; no injuries were found on the body of the prosecutorix; injuries received by the husband of the prosecutorix is also simple in nature; during investigation final report was submitted; a protest petition was filed; further reinvestigation was done and in reinvestigation charge-sheet was submitted under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 354B and Section 3(1)(10) of S.C./S.T. Actt and if they are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail or tamper with the evidence. He further submits that there is no likelihood of case being heard in near future.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but admitted that the appellant has no criminal history.
For the foregoing discussions, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The appeal is allowed. Impugned order dated 20.4.2018 rejecting bail of appellant is hereby set aside.
Let appellants Manish Kumar Singh, Tilak Kumar @ Tilakdhari Singh and Raju Singh involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
1. The appellants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The appellants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The appellants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The appellants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which thy are suspected.
5. The appellants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Office is directed to send the lower court record to the concerned court immediately, if it has been received.
Order Date :- 30.7.2018 OP