Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 14-A (2) of Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to set aside the order dated 24.01.2018 passed in Bail application No.06/2018, arising out of case crime No.330/2017, under Sections 376 I.P.C. and Section 3 (2) (5) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Uchchahar, District Raebareli. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that offence is alleged to have taken place on 15.5.2017. FIR has been lodged on 22.8.2017. It is further contended that the court below has failed to appreciate that prior to this incident one Gyanwati has lodged the FIR against the complainant's husband which was registered as Case Crime No.184 of 2017 under sections 376, 504, 506 IPC., Unchahar, District Raebareli. It is next contended that in the said case, the appellant supported Gyanwati and due to which the complainant has falsely implicated the appellant in the present case as the appellant refused to enter into the compromise in the earlier matter. The medical report also does not corroborate with the prosecution story. There is no explanation for delay. The appellant is languishing in jail since 6.1.2018 having no criminal history. Charge sheet has been filed and further that the judgment of the lower court suffers from non application of mind, as such the same is liable to be set aside. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail, but could not confront the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, that appellant is in jail since 6.1.2018 and has no criminal history without commenting upon merits, I am of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. In view of above, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order dated 24.01.2018 passed in Bail application No.06/2018, arising out of case crime No.330/2017, under Sections 376 I.P.C. and Section 3 (2) (5) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Uchchahar, District Raebareli, is set aside. Let the appellant Salikram Loniya, involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The appellant 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.
(v) 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(vi) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code. Order Date :- 30.8.2019 P.s.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 353 of 2018 Appellant :- Salikram Loniya Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Anr.
Counsel for Appellant :- Rahul Singh 'Rana',J.B. Singh,Km.Pratibha Vaish,Saurabh Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Orders on Application No. 106460 of 2018 Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that earlier counsel has inadvertently filed an application for condonation of delay. In fact the judgment of the trial court under challenge was passed on 24.1.2018 and appeal thereafter was filed within 90 days i.e. on 20.2.2018. This fact has also been corroborated by the office report which depicts that the appeal was filed in time up till 24.4.2018 therefore, there was no occasion for filing an application for condonation of delay therefore, the same is dismissed as not pressed. Order Date :- 30.8.2019 P.s.