Allowed

Anil v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC26 Sept 2019CRLA/4091/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allows a criminal appeal against the rejection of a bail application. The High Court set aside the impugned order and granted bail to the appellant Anil in a case under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is allowed; the bail application stands allowed; bail granted subject to personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4091 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Anil Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vikas Srivastava,Dharm Pal Yadav,Rajesh Kumar Srivastava,Ram Bahadur,Sachchida Nand Ojha Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sanjay Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the first informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the 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 8.5.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Allahabad in Bail Application no. 2404 of 2019 (Anil Kumar vs. State), arising out of Case Crime no. 358 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308, 452 IPC and Section 3(2) (5)A of SC/ST Act, P.S. Nawabganj, District- Prayagraj (Allahabad), seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.

¶8

As per the allegations made in the first information report, it is alleged that on 22.11.2016, the appellant is said to have entered in the house of opposite party no. 2 and abused the victim with the name of his caste with an intention to humiliate and intimidate him and assaulted him by lathi. On account of assault made by the appellant, Guddi Devi, Ganpat, Inder, Dhrupatti and Susheela have suffered injuries and have been medically examined. As per injury report of Guddi Devi, it is alleged that she suffered abraded contusion on her head while other injuries are simple in nature. Her supplementary injury report shows that she suffered a fracture on left parietal bone. The injuries of other victims have been noted to be simple in nature.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that as per the allegations made in the first information report and the statement of the victim Guddi Devi recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., general role of assault has been assigned to as many as four persons and the author of the fatal injury caused on the head of the victim has not been specified. Learned counsel for the appellant has next submitted that appellant is in jail since 29.4.2019 and has no criminal history to his credit. Learned counsel for the appellant has next submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from the judicial process and tampering with the evidence.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the first informant could not dispute the aforesaid facts and even in the statement of Guddi Devi, the author of the said fatal injury has not been specified and general role of

¶11

assault has been assigned to as many as four persons and the fact that the appellant is in jail since 29.4.2019 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶12

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, the appeal has substance. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.

¶13

The impugned order dated 8.5.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Allahabad, is set-aside and the bail application of appellant stands allowed.

¶14

Let the appellant Anil be released on bail in Case Crime no. 358 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308, 452 IPC and Section 3(2)(5)A of SC/ST Act, P.S. Nawabganj, District- Prayagraj (Allahabad), on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶15

(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.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 26.9.2019 KU

Anil v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil 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

Ravi Upadhayay Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ved Prakash and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Km. Ritu Darbari @ Ritu and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Chandaniya @ Rajveeri and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramesh Pal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Prajapati Vs State of U.P. and Another