Gang Rape Convict Who Underwent Over 20 Years Of Imprisonment Granted Bail By Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court last week granted bail to one 'Collector' who underwent over 20 yrs in jail after being convicted for the offence of Gang Rape. It was the convict's primary submission that since he has already undergone over 20 years of imprisonment and thus, in view of SC's ruling in the case of Saudan Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (Crl.Appeal No.308/ 2022), he is entitled to...
The Allahabad High Court last week granted bail to one 'Collector' who underwent over 20 yrs in jail after being convicted for the offence of Gang Rape.
It was the convict's primary submission that since he has already undergone over 20 years of imprisonment and thus, in view of SC's ruling in the case of Saudan Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (Crl.Appeal No.308/ 2022), he is entitled to be released on bail.
It may be noted that in Saudan Singh Case (supra), expressing concern about the long pendency of criminal appeals before the Allahabad High Court, the Supreme Court, on Feb 25, laid down some broad parameters that can be adopted by the High Court while granting bail.
The Court ordered :
"A list should be prepared for the ones who have served more than 14 years and is not a repeat offender. In all these cases there is a high possibility that if they are released they may not be interested to also pursue their appeals. The second category can be one where people have served more than 10 years and in one go bail can be granted."
Read more about the case here: Allahabad HC Criminal Appeals Pendency : SC Suggests Convicts Serving More Than 14 Yrs Sentence Be Granted Bail Or Considered For Early Remission
Now, in the instant case before the High Court, the bench of Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Ashutosh Srivastava was dealing with a bail application moved by the gang-rape convict (applicant) in an appeal filed by him against his conviction.
Essentially, he was convicted under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(g) IPC, and Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act. In his appeal, he argued that he was wrongly implicated in the case.
Further, in his bail application, it was submitted by him that he has already undergone 20 years, 8 months, and 18 days of imprisonment including remission, Prayer for bail of co-accused Ramvir has already been allowed by HC in April 2008 and that there is no likelihood of the appeal being heard in near future.
Considering the rival submissions of the counsel for the parties, facts and circumstances of the case, and period of incarceration of the applicant, prima facie, without expressing any opinion on the merits and without prejudice to the right of the applicant to pursue this appeal or pray for remission as per law, the Court opined that he was entitled to be released on bail.
"Let the applicant- Collector, convicted and sentenced in Sessions Trial No. 164 of 2005 (State Vs. Collector and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 1003 of 2004, under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(g) IPC and Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, P.S. Bilsanda, Distt. Pilibhit, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate, subject to furnishing undertaking that he will co-operate in the hearing of the appeal," the Court said.
Case title - Collector And Another Vs. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5815 of 2007]
Click Here To Read/Download Order