Allowed

Bauwa @ Narendra v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Oct 2019CRLA/4525/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal, the single judge set aside the order rejecting the appellant's bail application. The court found the lower court erred in refusing bail, considering the accused's lack of prior record and no likelihood of absconding, and directed his release subject to bond and conditions.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order rejecting bail is set aside and the appellant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each.

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

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4525 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Bauwa @ Narendra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Chandra Prakash Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Yatish Kumar Dwivedi

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, 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 17.6.2019, passed by Special Judge S.C./ST Act/Sessions Judge, Mahoba by which the bail application of the applicant in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 516 of 2019, (Bauwa alias Narendra vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 123 of 2019, under Sections 354, 323, 506 IPC and Section 3 (1) (b), 3(1) (Da) 3(1) (Gha) and 3(1) (va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S. Charkhari, District Mahoba has been rejected vide order dated 17.6.2019.

¶7

Learned counsel for the accused-appellant has submitted that as per allegations made in the FIR and statement of the victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. the appellant is said to have caught hold of her and tried to disrobe her and on alarm being raised her sister-in-law reached there and the appellant left the place of incident threatening her of life. Learned counsel for the appellant has next submitted that the victim has not suffered any injury on her person. Learned counsel for the appellant has next submitted that the appellant is in jail since 5.6.2019 and has no criminal history to his credit and there is no chance of appellant fleeing away from judicial process and tampering with the witnesses.

¶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.

¶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 17.6.2019 is liable to be set-aside and appeal is liable to be allowed.

¶10

The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 17.6.2019 passed by Special Judge S.C./ST Act/Sessions Judge, Mahoba is set-aside and the bail application of

¶11

appellant stands allowed.

¶12

Let the appellant, Bauwa @ Narendra be released on bail in Case Crime No. 123 of 2019, under Sections 354, 323, 506 IPC and Section 3 (1) (b), 3(1) (Da) 3(1) (Gha) and 3(1) (va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S. Charkhari, District Mahoba on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶13

(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.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 16.10.2019

¶18

Bauwa @ Narendra v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bauwa @ Narendra 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

Pala and Others Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Kuraisha Begam and 5 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ayodhya Prajapati Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Bahadure Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Santosh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satendra Rathaur Vs State of U.P. and Another