Allowed

Jagat Bahadur v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 Aug 2018CRLA/3133/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A criminal appeal against a bail rejection order in a case involving assault under IPC and the SC/ST Act. The High Court, noting the appellant's lack of criminal history and his time in custody, allowed the appeal and granted bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The appellant is released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions regarding appearance and conduct.

Jagat Bahadur Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 41

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3133 of 2018

¶3

Appellant :- Jagat Bahadur Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rakesh Pathak,Pritam Lal Patel Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar Singh,Rajesh Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State and Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the complainant, and perused the record.

¶6

This criminal appeal has been filed against order dated 31.5.2018 passed by Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Allahabad in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.336 of 2018 ( Jagat Bahadur and others vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 182 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 325 IPC and Section 3(2)(5) Ka of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Sarai Mamrej, District-Allahabad whereby bail application of appellant was rejected.

¶7

According to the prosecution case F.I.R. was lodged against four accused persons, namely Jagat Bahadur, Mahendra Kumar, Dharmendra Kumar and Jitendra Kumar alleging that on 19.7.2017, they assaulted Lakshmidhar, Savitri and Pyarelal with iron rods and lathies, but the injuries received by the injured were found simple in nature.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 31.5.2018 (about three months); having no criminal history; the appellant has been falsely implicated; injuries received by the injured were found simple in nature; there is no independent witness and if he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the trial.

¶9

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but admitted that the appellant has no criminal history.

¶10

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 31.5.2018 rejecting bail of appellant is hereby set aside.

¶11

Let appellant Jagat Bahadur involved in aforesaid case be

¶12

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:-

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

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.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 28.8.2018 OP

Jagat Bahadur v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagat Bahadur 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

Daya Ram Vs State

Smt. Sunita Devi and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Dilla @ Istkhar Vs State of U.P.

Anees Vs State of U.P.

Shahina Vs Anwar

Shane Alam Vs State of U.P.