Tanwar Kuraishi v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 85 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10227 of 2023 Appellant :- Tanwar Kuraishi Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Satya Prakash Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J. Counter affidavit filed today by learned A.G.A is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the informant, learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant to set aside the impugned order dated

18.08.2023 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sonbhadra has rejected the bail application No. 1933 of 2023, arising out of case crime no.155 of 2023, under Sections 307, 147, 148, 504, 506 of IPC, Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 4/25 Arms Act and under Section 3(1)r and 3(1)s of SC/ST Act, Police Station Obra, District Sonbhadra. As per the F.I.R, the allegation that son of the informant namely Sunny along with his friends Aditiya, Suraj and Ansh went to a field on 13.07.2023 at around 7:30 p.m some unknown persons who have covered their faces attacked with sharp edged weapon to his son in which he sustained injuries. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that name of the appellant was disclosed by the informant during her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she is not the eye witness of the incident. It is further submitted that injured Sunny has attributed the role of catching hold to the appellant. It is also submitted that injured has given statement that 35 to 40 persons came there, therefore, it cannot be ascertained that appellant is the author of the injury. It is further submitted that so far as the recovery of knife is concerned no role of attacking with knife, either by the informant or by the injured, is attributed to the appellant. Appellant is languishing in jail since

15.07.2023 and criminal history of the appellant has been explained in Annexure-8 of the affidavit in which appellant has already been granted bail. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. Per contra, learned A.G.A. assisted by the learned counsel for the respondent have supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant but could not dispute the aforesaid factual aspects of the matter. It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the trial court has not properly considered the case of the appellant. Hence, in view of above consideration, the impugned order of rejection of bail is, hereby, set aside. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant; appellant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, Court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Let appellant, Tanwar Kuraishi 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 subject to the following conditions:

(i) 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.

(ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.

(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 the trial court.

(v) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

(vi) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that 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 in accordance with law. The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the appellant, if there is no other legal impediment. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. The criminal appeal is allowed. Order Date :- 31.10.2023 PS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad