Allowed

Lav Kush v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC14 Oct 2019CRLA/3066/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge allowed the criminal appeal and set aside the lower court's order rejecting bail. The appellant Lav Kush was released on bail with personal and surety bonds, subject to conditions regarding attendance and non-interference, in a case under SC/ST Act and IPC sections.

What did the court decide?

Bail application allowed; impugned order set aside. Release on bail with personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to conditions.

Lav Kush Vs State of U.P. and Another — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3066 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Lav Kush Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vijay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Krishna Dutt Awasthi

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Shri K.D.Singh, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present criminal appeal has been filed U/s 14(A)(2) of S.C./S.T. Act against the order dated 28.2.2019, passed by Additional Session Judge/ Special Judge, D.A.A.Act, Auraiya by which the bail application of the applicant in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 224 of 2019, (Lavkush vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 1058 of 2018, under Sections 363, 364A IPC and Section 3 (2) (v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S. Auraiya, District Auraiya, has been rejected vide order dated 28.2.2019.

¶7

Learned counsel for the accused-appellant has submitted that the appellant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the appellant has next submitted that similarly place co-accused, namely, Prakhar Mishra, Amit Alias Nagesh and Nikhil Alias Rampal have already been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 22844 of 2019, 20329 of 2019 and 19254 of 2019 vide orders dated 3.7.019, 16.5.2019 and 18.7.2019 respectively. Learned counsel for the appellant has next submitted that the case of the appellant stands on the same footing as that of other co-accused who have already been granted bail. Learned counsel for the appellant has next submitted that the appellant is in jail since 4.12.2018. The criminal history of the appellant has been explained in para 4 to 8 of the rejoinder affidavit.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the first informant has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact that similarly placed co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court and the appellant is in jail since 4.12.2018.

¶9

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, I find that the court below has acted wrongly in rejecting the bail application and the impugned order dated 28.2.2019 is liable to be set-aside and appeal is liable to be allowed.

¶10

The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 28.2.2019 passed by Additional Session Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Auraiya is set-aside and the bail application of appellant stands allowed.

¶11

Let the appellant, Lav Kush be released on bail in Case Crime No. 1058 of 2018, under Sections 363, 364A IPC and Section 3 (2) (v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S. Auraiya, District Auraiya, on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (One surety of family member) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶12

(i) The 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.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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 appellant to prison.

¶16

Order Date :- 14.10.2019 R

Lav Kush v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lav Kush 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

Vinod Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Enamulhaq Alias Salman Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Vinod and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jagan Vs State of U.P.

Atul Tiwari and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rama Kant Tiwari and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.