Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5202 of 2019 Appellant :- Rohit Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vivek Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Alok Tripathi Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Sri Vivek Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Alok Tripathi, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
By means of this criminal appeal under Section 14A(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 04.07.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act Meerut, in Bail Application No. 2759 of 2019 (Rohit Vs. State of U.P., arising out of case crime no. 166 of 2019, under Sections 376D, 354,323,504,506 IPC and Section 3 (2) 5 SC/ST Act, Police Station- Delhi Gate, District- Meerut.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive of informant. Learned counsel further submits that the prosecutrix/victim is a married women aged about 26 years. The FIR was registered, under sections 354, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C, P.S Delhi Gate, District Meerut by the victim himself against the appellant. It is submitted that, in the first information report, the victim has not mentioned that the appellant and his friends were committed rape with her. For the first time the informant/victim reveals that about 2-3 years back she was ravished by the Rohit and his friends. Thus there is sea change in the situation without any justification. Lastly, it was submitted that initially the FIR was lodged by the victim herself attracting the provisions of Sections 354 and other allied Sections of IPC which was gradually swelled and ultimately landed to the allegation of gang rape in her 164 Cr.P.C. statement. No good reason is attributed for this change in the instance. Learned counsel further submits that the victim has medically examined in District Womens Hospital and as per the medical examination report, no sign of rape has been found by the doctor. Learned counsel further submits that the appellant is a peace loving and law abiding person and have no any previous criminal history against the appellant. The appellant is languishing in jail since 29.05.2019.
Learned A.G.A as well as learned counsel for complainant opposed the prayer for bail and could not dispute the aforementioned facts.
The submissions 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- Rohit, 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 04.07.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act,Meerut, is hereby set aside.
Order Date :- 29.11.2019 G.S