Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5916 of 2019 Appellant :- Rolu Srivastava @ Vikas Srivastava Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Santosh Kumar Kesarwani Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ashutosh Pandey
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Counter affidavit filed today, is taken on record.
Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Kesarwani, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Ashutosh Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 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 Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3506 of 2019 (Rolu Srivastava @ Vikas Srivastava vs. State of U.P.) rejection order dated 11.09.2019 passed by the Special Judge (S.C./S.T.) Act Varansi in Case Crime No.616 of 2018 under Sections 279, 323, 504, 304 IPC Section 3 (1) (da), 3 (1) (dha) and Section 3 (2) (Va) of the SC/ST Act, P.S. Bhelupur, District Varanasi.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that F.I.R. was lodged by the widow of the deceased in respect of the incident which took place on 17.10.2018, in which deceased lost his life during twilight period of 18.10.2018. The F.I.R of the incident was got lodged after one month and there is no plausible justification coming forward for this inordinate delay. It is a clear case of accidental injury. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.08.2019 and the trial is not conclude in near future. It has further been submitted that if he enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
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 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, and period of incarceration undergone by him, I am of the view that the appellant has made out a fit case for bail.
Let the appellant- Rolu Srivastava @ Vikas Srivastava, 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 APPELLANT 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 THEIR 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 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 11.09.2019 passed by learned Special Judge (S.C./S.T.) Act Varanasi, is hereby set aside.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 Pr/-