Allowed

Brajraj Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Aug 2018CRLA/2356/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal against the Special Court's rejection of bail under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC and the SC/ST Act. The Court set aside the impugned order and directed the appellant's release on bail with standard conditions, noting the appellant had languished in custody for over eleven months and the prosecution evidence appeared weak.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 2.4.2018 rejecting bail set aside; appellant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties under specific conditions.

Brajraj Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 41

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2356 of 2018

¶3

Appellant :- Brajraj Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sanjay Singh Sengar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Notice has been served to father of opposite party no. 2 Sunil Ahirvar but none is present on behalf of opposite party no. 2.

¶6

Heard Sri Sanjay Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri O.P. Singh, Brief Holder for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This criminal appeal has been filed against order dated 2.4.2018 passed by Special Judge, S.C./S.T./ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Mahoba in Bail Application No. 166 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 113 of 2017, under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC & Section 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(5)Ka SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kharela, District- Mahoba whereby bail application of appellant was rejected.

¶8

According to the prosecution case F.I.R. was lodged on 15.8.2017 against the applicant alleging that on 12.8.2017 he assaulted Devidin, he received two injuries and fibula was found fractured.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 31.8.2017 (more than eleven); there is criminal history of six cases against the appellant has been properly explained. There is no independent witness against the appellant. Prosecution case is not supported by the medical evidence. All injuries found on the body of injured are simple in nature except one injury. Offences are not made out against the appellant. The entire prosecution story is absolutely false, baseless and concocted. The appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to previous enmity. There is no legal evidence against the appellant and if he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail or tamper with the evidence.

¶10

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and admitted that criminal history has been properly explained.

¶11

For the foregoing discussions, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The appeal is allowed. Impugned order dated

¶12

2.4.2018 rejecting bail of appellant is hereby set aside.

¶13

Let appellant Brajraj Singh involved in aforesaid 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:-

¶14

The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

2.The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

3.The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶17

4.The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶18

5.The appellant 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.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶20

Office is directed to send the lower court record to the concerned court immediately, if it has been received.

¶21

Order Date :- 8.8.2018 A. Singh

Brajraj Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brajraj Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd.Rizwan Vs State of Up

Abdul Majid Vs Ram Dhani

Chhotey Lal Vs State

Munna Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manoj Kumar Rajpoot Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kamal Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another