Riyasat Ali and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 85 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9408 of 2023 Appellant :- Riyasat Ali And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ratnesh Kumar Singh,Rajendra Prasad,Surya Lal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Anil Kumar,Nitesh Kumar Singh Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J. List revised. No one appears for the informant. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of appellants is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellants with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 26.07.2023 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Sonbhadra in Bail Application No. 1687 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 898 of 2022, under Sections 354, 354-B, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3 (2) (V-A), 3 (1)

(Dha) and 3 (1) (Ba) of SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Robertsganj, District Sonebhadra. As per prosecution version on 13.12.2021 at around 4 pm when prosecutrix had gone to purchase momos, appellants who were already sitting there, passed comments against her and committed obscene activities with her by touching her private part. They have also torn her cloths. They beaten and abused her by addressing caste related words. She was also threatened by the appellants. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that the appellants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. The incident is said to have taken place on 13.12.2021 while application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was moved by the informant on 21.02.2022 after more than two months of the incident. Perusal of the contents of the first information report indicates that it was drafted with the assistance of legal advisor. As per medical report, the injury sustained by the victim were found to be simple in nature. It is further submitted that so far as name of appellant Riyasat is concerned, it was mentioned as Isthaq by the informant in the first information report but during investigation she by mistake taken the name of Isthaq while the correct name is Riyasat, therefore, the involvement of appellant Riyasat in the incident is doubtful. It is also submitted that in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she did not attribute any act or role to the appellant Riyasat, therefore, the entire prosecution story is doubtful. The appellants do not have any criminal history to their credit. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that there is no chance of the appellants fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The appellants are languishing in jail since 26.07.2023 and in case they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that eye witnesses Dinesh Bihari and Manohar Pasi had witnessed the incident but could not dispute the aforesaid factual aspects of the matter. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, this Court is of the view that the appellants have made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellants is set-aside. Let the appellants, namely, Riyasat Ali and Chini @ Nadirshah involved in the above Case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

(i) The appellants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The appellants will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

(iii) The appellants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

(iv) The appellants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

(v) The appellants 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. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 1.11.2023 AKT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad