The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 is fundamental, and prolonged custody without trial can justify bail, especially when prosecution fails to produce witnesses.

ORDER :

GANESH RAM MEENA, J.

1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the accused- appellant against the order dated 28.05.2024, passed by the Court of learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Alwar (for short ‘the trial Court’) in Bail Application No.220/2024(CIS No.211/2024) in connection with F.I.R. No.88/2024, registered at Police Station Aravali Vihar, District Alwar for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 388, 389 & 120B of IPC and Sections 3(2)(va) & 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby the learned trial Court dismissed bail application filed by the accused-appellant.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the accused-appellant submits that the accused-appellant has been implicated in this case based on false and fabricated story. Counsel further submits that the F.I.R. was registered by the complainant, who is a Police Constable, on 06.02.2024 as regards the alleged incident dated 27.04.2021. She further submits that the accused-appellant, who is a woman, was arrested on 16.02.2024 and the Police after completion of investigation, submitted charge-sheet in the matter. Counsel also submits that the learned trial Court has framed charges against the accused-appellant along with co-accused on 23.07.2024 and the prosecution witnesses are not turning up before the learned trial Court for their examination and the accused-appellant, who is a woman, has to suffer the custody even without there being any fault on her part. Counsel further submits that it is a fundamental right of the accused-appellant to have speedy trial as envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Counsel also submits that the accused-appellant is a woman and is in custody since 16.02.2024 and co-accused Digamber Singh S/o Shri Vijendra Singh has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 10.12.2024 passed in S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No.3284/2024. Counsel further submits that the present appellant may be released on bail. Counsel has placed on record the order-sheets of the learned trial Court, which are taken on record.

3. On an intimation made through the S.H.O. of concerned police station, counsel for the complainant has put in appearance before this Court.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the prayer made on behalf of the accused-appellant for releasing the accused-appellant on bail and submits that there are specific allegations against the accused- appellant. Counsel further submits that there are several other criminal cases pending against the accused-appellant and she is in habit of extorting money under threat of registration of cases and later on she enters into compromise. Counsel also submits that the criminal appeal filed by co-accused- Digamber Singh S/o Shri Vijendra Singh was allowed by this Court without there being any intimation to the complainant.

5. Considered the submissions made at Bar and also perused the challan papers and the material available on record.

6. On submissions of the counsel for the complainant that the appeal of the co-accused- Digamber Singh S/o Shri Vijendra Singh was disposed of without there being any intimation to the complainant, this Court summoned the record of S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 3284/2024 of co-accused- Digmber Singh S/o Shri Vijendra Singh from the office of learned Public Prosecutor.

7. On perusal of the record of aforesaid criminal appeal of co-accused- Digmber Singh S/o Shri Vijendra Singh received from the office of learned Public Prosecutor, it is found that the complainant was intimated through S.H.O. of Police Station Aravali Vihar, District Alwar vide letter dated 09.12.2024, as regards the filing/hearing of the criminal appeal No.3284/2024 as is evident from letter dated 09.12.2014 written by concerned S.H.O. to the Government Advocate.

8. The letter dated 09.12.2024, which is attached with the file of the Public Prosecutor's office in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.3284/20