Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Renu vs State Of U P And Anr

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 November, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5284 of 2019 Appellant :- Renu Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Appellant :- Ved Prakash Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Pradeep Kumar Sharma
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Ms. Amrita Singh, holding brief of Sri Pradeep Kumar Sharma, 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 quashing the bail rejection order dated 11.07.2019 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Court no.2, Bareilly in Bail Application No.2529 of 2019 in case crime no.315 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 364, 452, 323, 504, 307, 120-B IPC and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) and 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Bhojipura, District-Bareilly.
Submission made by learned counsel for the appellant is that the case of the appellant stand on similar footing qua co- accused-Seema whose appeal was allowed by this Court on 20.11.2019. The facts of the present case are identical to the abovementioned criminal appeal. In this continuation, parity has also been claimed. The appellant is languishing in jail since 03.07.2019.
Learned A.G.A as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail but 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 applicant has made out a fit case for bail.
Let the appellant-Renu, 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 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 APPLICANT 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 APPLICANT 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 APPLICANT 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 APPLICANT 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 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 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 11.07.2019 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Court no.2, Bareilly, is hereby set aside.
Order Date :- 29.11.2019 Sumit S
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Renu vs State Of U P And Anr

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 November, 2019
Judges
  • Rahul Chaturvedi
Advocates
  • Ved Prakash Mishra