The Allahabad High Court while granting conditional bail to the rape accused of Pakri police station of Ballia, said that cannot be denied bail to accused only on the ground of criminal history.
A Single Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Sarvjeet Pandey @ Paplu Pandey.
The Applicant seeks bail in Case under Sections 376, 452, 504, 506 of I.P.C, Police Station-Pakri, District-Ballia, during the pendency of trial.
On 12.12.2023 at about 11:00 AM, the applicant is stated to have barged into the house of the informant in the absence of her husband and outraged her modesty and after hurling abuses at her, he had even threatened to put her to death.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case due to ulterior motives. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR.
The FIR is delayed by about 24 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Initially, the FIR was instituted u/s 354, 452, 504, 506 of IPC only but subsequently during the statement of the victim recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C, the allegations of rape have been made against the applicant. The said allegations have been made after legal consultation.
The prosecution story stands falsified from the fact that the victim has stated in her statement that the applicant is stated to have assaulted her husband and caused injuries to his abdomen by knife but there is no medical report of the husband of the victim, as such, the applicant is entitled for bail.
It is also alleged that the applicant had cut his hand at the time of offence but the same also does not stand corroborated by his arrest memo.
The applicant is the real brother-in-law (Dewar) of the victim and has been falsely implicated in the present case out of family feud.
The applicant has a criminal history of four cases which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit. He has been languishing in jail since 20.02.2024 and deserves to be released on bail. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.
The bail application has been opposed but the submissions raised by the counsel for the applicant could not be disputed.
In so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, it is not the case of the State that applicant might tamper with or otherwise adversely influence the investigation, or that he might intimidate witnesses before or during the trial. The State has also not placed any material that applicants in the past attempted to evade the process of law, the Court noted.
If the accused is otherwise found to be entitled to bail, he cannot be denied bail only on the ground of criminal history, no exceptional circumstances on the basis of criminal antecedents have been shown to deny bail to accused, hence, the Court does not feel it proper to deny bail to the applicant just on the ground of criminal antecedent, the Court said.
The Court observed that,
The well-known principle of “Presumption of Innocence Unless Proven Guilty,” gives rise to the concept of bail as a rule and imprisonment as an exception. A person’s right to life and liberty, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, cannot be taken away simply because the person is accused of committing an offence until the guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt.
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that no one’s life or personal liberty may be taken away unless the procedure established by law is followed, and the procedure must be just and reasonable. The said principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 (10) SCC 51. AGA could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.
“It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by the AGA.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail”, the Court further observed while allowing the bail application.
The Court ordered that,
Let the applicant- Sarvjeet Pandey @ Paplu Pandey, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his 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 are verified.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.
(ii) 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 him in accordance with law.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.