Allowed

Ashok and Anr. v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 May 2019CRLA/3113/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal, the High Court allowed bail for the appellants challenging the rejection of their bail application in a death case involving SC/ST atrocity allegations. The court set aside the impugned order and directed release on personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; appellants released on bail on personal bond with two sureties each.

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

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3113 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Ashok And Anr. Respondent :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Neeraj Kumar Chaurasiya,Rakesh Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Sri Alok Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of complainant, is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

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 30.3.2019 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST) Act/Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 823 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime no. 479 of 2016, under Sections 147, 328, 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, P.S. Sachendi, districtKanpur Nagar, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.

¶8

As per prosecution version, informant Rekha had solemnized marriage with the deceased Vivek Kumar, who was member of Scheduled Castes. The father of the informant and family members were annoyed witht he marriage of the informant with the deceased Vivek Kumar. On 7.11.2016 at about 7:00 P.M. appellants and other co-accused Ashok Kushwaha, Ajay Kushwaha and Amit Kumar came at the house of the informant and after one hour, after some consultation, they took Vivek Kumar with them. Later on on the same day at about 11:30 P.M., Vivek Kumar returned at his house. On the next day, i.e. 8.11.2016, he died.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that on the written information of the informant, inquest of the dead body of the deceased was conducted. In the written information it has been mentioned that on 7.11.2016 at 7:00 P.M. the deceased has become suddenly ill and in the next morning at about 7:00 A.M. he was being taken to the hospital and on the way he died. He next submitted that on 22.11.2016 the informant had moved an application before Senior Superintendent of Police, Kanpur Nagar, in which she has stated that her father and brother had administered poison to her husband Vivek Kumar and as a result of which he died. There is no evidence against the appellants regarding administering poison to the deceased. The implication of the appellants in the present case is based only upon suspicion. Further submission is that the appellants are absolutely innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to some ulterior motive. He also submitted that other co-accused Radheyshyam Kushwaha, father of the complainant, Amit Kumar and Kallu alias Arun and Ashwani have already been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide orders dated 23.1.2019, 5.3.2019 and 21.5.2019 respectively passed in Criminal Appeal Nos. 2332 of 2018, 984 of 2019 and 3188 of 2019, copy of the bail orders produced by learned counsel for the appellants is taken on record. He lastly submitted that the appellants, who are in jail since 11.7.2018 and 28.1.2018 and have no criminal antecedents to their credit are entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.

¶10

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

¶11

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.

¶12

In the result, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned order dated 30.3.2019 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST) Act/Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar is hereby set aside.

¶13

Let the appellants, Ashok and Ajay be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following condition :-

¶14

The applicants will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶15

They will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶16

Order Date :- 22.5.2019 Mini

Ashok and Anr. v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok and Anr. v. State of U.P.

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

Aditya Shahi @ Chunmu Shahi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Narayan Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Singh and 05 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Shukveer Vs State of U.P.

Kamla Devi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Golu Mishra @ Anurag Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another