Allowed

Rajaram v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 May 2019CRLA/3000/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act challenged a bail refusal order. The Single Judge held it was a fit case for bail without expressing an opinion on merits and set aside the impugned order, releasing the appellant on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; Appellant Rajaram released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties.

Rajaram Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3000 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Rajaram Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Geetam Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed challenging the order dated 2.4.2019 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge Second/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Kasganj in Bail Application No.393 of 2019(State Vs. Rajaram), arising out of Case Crime No.11 of 2019, under Section 302 IPC and Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station Sikandarpur Vaish, District Kasganj, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.

¶7

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that the role of assault of fire arm injury has been assigned to co-accused Revaram Shakya and only one gun shot injury was fired of the deceased and no other gun shot injury was found on the person of the deceased. He further submitted that the deceased has received only one gun shot injury, which was alleged to have caused by Revaram Shakya. Lastly he submitted that the appellant is languishig in jail since 19.3.2019, having no criminal history and in case is he released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A., for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the aforementioned order is hereby set aside.

¶10

Let the appellant Rajaram be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶11

Order Date :- 17.5.2019 Mini

Rajaram v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajaram 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

Brijesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Amir Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Jitendra Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Sattar Khan and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jay Singh Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Umakant Aheer Vs State of U.P. and Anr.