Allowed

Manohar Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Oct 2019CRLA/4389/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a criminal appeal challenging the rejection of a second bail application under the SC/ST Act. The High Court set aside the impugned order and granted bail to the appellant, Manohar Gupta, subject to specific conditions. The decision considered rival cross-FIRs, injuries to both sides, and the similarity in placement of a co-accused.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 17.6.2019 is set-aside and appellant released on bail on personal bond with two sureties each satisfying the court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4389 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Manohar Gupta Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Aalok Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Deep Chand Singh,Manvendra Narain Pathak

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed by learned AGA on behalf of the State is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Deep Chand Singh 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 17.6.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Deoria in 2nd Bail Application no. 728 of 2019 in S.T. No. 160 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime no. 158 of 2018, under Sections 147, 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(da) (dha) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Baghauch Ghat, District- Deoria, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in respect of the present incident, cross FIRs have been lodged from both the sides and both the sides have suffered injuries. From the side of the applicant, as many as two persons have suffered injuries whereas from the side of the first informant, four persons have suffered injuries. Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that who, out of the two rival groups, was aggressor, could not be determined at this stage. Learned counsel for the appellant has next submitted that similarly placed co-accused Suresh Gupta has already been granted bail and the case of the appellant stands on the same footing. Learned counsel for the appellant has next submitted that appellant in in jail since 7.6.2019 and criminal history of the appellant has been explained in paragraph-16 of the affidavit. Lastly, it is submitted that chances of trial being concluded in the near future is very bleak due to heavy dockets.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the first informant has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the fact that the appellant is in jail since 7.6.2019 and similarly placed co-accused has already

¶10

been granted bail.

¶11

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.

¶12

The impugned order dated 17.6.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Deoria, is set-aside and the bail application of appellant stands allowed.

¶13

Let the appellant Manohar Gupta be released on bail in Case Crime No. Case Crime no. 158 of 2018, under Sections 147, 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(da) (dha) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Baghauch Ghat, District- Deoria, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶14

(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.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 18.10.2019 KU

Manohar Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manohar Gupta 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

Amar Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mathura and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Vishram and Another Vs State of Up and Anr.

Ankit Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mohammad Ibram @ Imran Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shyam Narain Dubey and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.