Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5787 of 2019 Appellant :- Vikash Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Dharmendra Kumar Singh,Avinash Kumar Singh,Rajesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sipahi Lal Shukla
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the complainant today in the Court is taken on record.
Heard Sri Dharmendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sipahi Lal Shukla 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 setting-aside the bail rejection order dated 02.09.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jaunpur in Bail Application No.189 of 2019(Vikas Yadav Vs. State of U.P) arising out of case crime no.259 of 2019 under Sections 376, 452, 511, 392, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Kerakat, District-Jaunpur by which the learned Special Judge has rejected the bail application of the applicant/appellant.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the FIR was got registered by the victim herself under the aforesaid actions of I.P.C. on 10.07.2019 for the incident said to have been taken place on 21.04.2019 against Ashish Yadav and Vikas Yadav for the alleged act of attempt to rape upon her. As per medical the age of the victim is 20 years and the victim has declined to get herself medically examined. There is a sea change in the FIR and the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. for which there is no plausible justification is coming farward. The applicant is languishing in jail since 14.08.2019.
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 applicant, 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 case for bail.
Let the applicant-Vikash Yadav, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their 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 SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE 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.
(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this court.
Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned order dated 02.09.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jaunpur is hereby set aside.
Order Date :- 27.11.2019 Abhishek Sri.