Sahil @ Faheem and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 85 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 11114 of 2023 Appellant :- Sahil @ Faheem And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Prabhat Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Manish Tiwari Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and learned counsel for the informant 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 appellants to set aside the impugned order dated

19.07.2023 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Kasganj has rejected the bail application of the appellants moved by him in Case Crime No. 338 of 2023, under Sections 302, 201 of IPC, Police Station Kasganj, District Kasganj. There is an allegation in the FIR that on 21.05.2023 at around 6.00 am, the informant got to know about the death of her son namely Chaman Prakash. The Body of her son was lying beneath the tractor of the appellant Sahil. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. The injuries noted in the postmortem report does not indicate that the deceased was assaulted by the appellants while all the injuries occurred when the deceased died under the heavy impression of liquor. It is also submitted that during trial PW-1 Mahadevi deposed that her son died due to excessive consumption of liquor. The appellant did not commit murder of her (PW-1) son. The another witness PW-2 Harishankar who happens to be the brother in law (Jeeja) of the deceased also did not make any allegation against the appellants. It is a case of malicious prosecution under the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act. Appellants are languishing in jail since 03.06.2023 having no criminal history. In case, the appellants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellants and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature but he could not point out any material to the contrary. 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 order of rejection of bail passed by the trial court dated 19.07.2023 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 appellants, Sahil @ Faheem and Mohd. Wasim 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 subject to the following conditions:

(i) 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.

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

(iii) The appellants 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 appellants 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 appellants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their 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 :- 30.11.2023 Mohit High Court of Judicature at Allahabad