Allowed

Satish Singh v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC6 Sept 2018CRLA/476/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed the criminal appeal and set aside the order rejecting bail. The court held that a case for bail was made out considering the facts, circumstances, and evidence, despite the heinous nature of the offense.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed; the order rejecting bail was set aside; appellant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 476 of 2018

¶3

Appellant :- Satish Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Mr A Kumar Srivastava,Pankaj Satsangi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Despite service of notice as indicated in the counter affidavit, counsel for opposite party no.2 has not appeared to argued the appeal.

¶6

Heard Shri A Kumar Srivastava & Sri Pankaj Satsangi, learned counsels for the appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This appeal has been filed against the judgement and order dated 24.11.2017 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Badaun, in Bail Application No.3489 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No.558 of 2017, under Sections 452, 376, 323, 504 I.P.C. & section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, P.S. Bilsi, District Badaun, by which bail plea of appellant has been rejected.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the victim is a grownup married lady aged about 25 years. According to prosecution on the fateful day, the prosecutrix was sleeping along with three children, the eldest being eight years old. It is alleged that the applicant entered the house and committed rape on her and on hearing her cry, the family members reached there and nabbed the applicant. Learned counsel for the appellant states that from the tenor of the statement of the victim, the reality and truth seems otherwise. The prosecution version of forcibly raped on the victim is not supported by medical evidence. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 6.10.2017 having no criminal antecedents.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶10

Having heard the submission of learned counsel for the applicantappellant, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of accusation against appellant and evidence in support of it and unlikelihood of conclusion of trial in near future, I find that a case for bail has been made out.

¶11

In the result, appeal stands allowed. The order dated 24.11.2017 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Badaun, in Bail Application No.3489 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No.558 of 2017, under Sections 452, 376, 323, 504 I.P.C. & section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, P.S. Bilsi, District Badaun, is set aside.

¶12

Let appellant-applicant-Satish Singh, be released on bail in aforesaid case

¶13

on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant-appellant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.

¶15

(ii) The applicant-appellant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

(iii) The applicant-appellant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶17

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶18

Order Date :- 6.9.2018

¶19

Hasnain

Satish Singh v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish Singh v. State of U.P. and Anr.

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

Shanker Vs State of U.P.

Tasleem Khan Vs State of U.P.

Devraj @ Ganesh Vs State of U.P.

Balwant Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Kumar Bharti Vs State of U.P.

Raju Vs State of U.P.