Allowed

Jayhind Rajpoot v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC14 May 2019CRLA/2262/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal under Section 14 A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the High Court allowed the appellant's appeal against the bail rejection order. The court set aside the previous order and granted bail. No detailed merits were discussed in this order.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 13.02.2019 was set aside, and the appellant was released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing sureties.

Jayhind Rajpoot Vs State of U.P. and… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2262 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Jayhind Rajpoot Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vijay Bahadur Shivhare Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This criminal appeal under Section 14 A(2) of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed challenging the order dated 13.02.2019 passed by learned IInd Special Judge/Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Hamirpur in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 65/2019 (Sitaram vs. State of U.P.) in Case Crime no. 114 of 2018, under Section 304 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5 ) SC/ST (P.A.) Act, P.S. Chikasi, district-Hamirpur, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as per First Information Report the alleged incident has taken place after 7.11.2018 at 3.12 P.M. and the dead body of the deceased Pawan was found on 8.1.2018 near Hanuman Temple, Chikasi at the bank of river and natural death was reported to the police and the police completed formalities of panchayatnama and the dead was body was cremated. After cremation on 10.11.2018 it was alleged that the accused Jayhind, Shrawan Kumar Vishwakarma and Sitaram committed murder of the deceased and he was pushed towards bank of river from Teela of the temple and as a result of injuries he died. Learned counsel for the

¶7

appellant further submitted that the present accused appellant Jayhind Rajpoot is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case by the applicant family just to get money from the Government. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that this report was lodged on the information given by real brother of the deceased. He further submitted that the deceased brother Mangal Singh has given statement to the police on 25.12.2018 and previous statement on 15.11.2018 that Jayhind and Sitaram came to his house on 7.11.2018 and Pawan went with them. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the statement of Smt.Lalti Devi, Chandi Devi and Gaya Prasad was recorded at a very belated stage and no one has seen the present accused committing the injuries to the deceased and throwing him towards bank of river. He has further submitted that the injury no.4 is deep abrasion at left side chest, abdomen and Trunk, size of abraded area is 37x 13 cm . Soft stab of blood present. This could come only by falling. He lastly submitted that the appellant languishing is in jail since 21.12.2018 having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the trial.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has not disputed the statement of the witnesses.

¶9

Without commenting on the merits of the case, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the bail application filed before the court below deserves to be allowed. It is ordered accordingly.

¶10

In the result, the appeal succeeds and the same stands

¶11

allowed. Impugned order dated 13.02.2019 passed by learned IInd Special Judge/Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Hamirpur is hereby set aside.

¶12

Let the applicant-appellant,Jayhind Rajpoot be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. Order Date :- 14.5.2019/Rk

Jayhind Rajpoot v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayhind Rajpoot 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

Shyam Lal Vs State of U.P.

Durvesh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Harswroop Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pappu Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nazim Vs State of U.P. and Another