Allowed

Gorakh Nishad v. State of U.P. and Anotehr

Allahabad HC13 Jun 2018CRLA/616/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the criminal appeal against the rejection of bail under the SC/ST Act. The High Court found a case for bail as the complainant had admitted voluntary relations and the trial would not conclude soon. Bail was granted subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to the appellant-appellant on personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions regarding trial attendance and conduct.

Gorakh Nishad Vs State of U.P. and Anotehr — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 53

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 616 of 2018

¶3

Appellant :- Gorakh Nishad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anotehr Counsel for Appellant :- Pramod Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

In view of the office report dated 29th March, 2018, service of notice upon the complainant is treated to be sufficient. Despite service of notice, none has appeared for the complainant. A counter affidavit has also been filed on behalf of State by the learned A.G.A., which is on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This appeal has been filed against the order dated 3.1.2018 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Gorakhpur, in Bail Application No.4037 of 2017, in Special Trial No.2370 of 2017 (State Vs. Gorakh Nishad), arising out of Case Crime No.1056 of 2017, under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC & Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, P.S. Cant, District Gorakhpur, by which bail plea of appellant has been rejected.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant has invited attention of the Court to the averments made in the First Information Report as also the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., in which the prosecutrix has clearly admitted that she knew the appellant and had voluntarily established physical relations with him. It is also stated that a marriage was performed but later on the appellant has refused to marry her and she is being forced to abort. It is also stated that various abuses have been hurled, which bring the offence within the clutches of SC/ST Act. Learned counsel submits that parties knew each other over a long period of time and physical relations were established voluntarily. It is stated that the appellant is otherwise in jail since October, 2017.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer made for grant of bail.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, 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 grant of bail has been made out.

¶11

In the result, appeal is allowed. The order dated 3.1.2018 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Gorakhpur is set aside.

¶12

Let appellant-applicant Gorakh Nishad be released on bail in aforesaid case 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:-

¶13

(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.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 13.6.2018 Anil

Gorakh Nishad v. State of U.P. and Anotehr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gorakh Nishad v. State of U.P. and Anotehr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pankaj and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vishal Sarswat Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shree Ram Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Kamlesh Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ram Pher Verma and 2 Others Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate,Shahganj and 2 Others

Mithai Lal and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another