Sumit Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 85 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9849 of 2023 Appellant :- Sumit Sharma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Anurag Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J. Compliance affidavit filed today by learned A.G.A is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, 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 order dated 25.08.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Kushinagar at Padrauna has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 675 of 2023, under Sections 376, 506 of IPC, and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kasya, District Khushinagar. The case of the prosecution as per the F.I.R is that appellant on the pretext of marriage establish physical relation with the informant. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that age of the victim is 21 years and she was a consenting party. It is further submitted that victim refuse to undergo her internal and external medical examination. It is further submitted that victim establish physical relations with the appellant at her own accord. Appellant is languishing in jail since 28.07.2023 having no criminal history. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail 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 appellant has 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 appellant is set-aside. Let appellants, Sumit Sharma, 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 :- 7.11.2023 PS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad