Allowed

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

Allahabad HC18 Oct 2019CRLA/4627/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Appeal No. 4627 of 2019, the Allahabad High Court allowed the appeal petition challenging the bail refusal order dated 5.7.2019. The Court set aside the prior order and granted bail to the appellants in a case involving offences under the SC/ST Act and IPC, imposing standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

The impugned bail refusal order dated 5.7.2019 was set aside and bail granted to the appellants upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each.

Shyam Narain Dubey and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4627 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Shyam Narain Dubey And Anr. Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Ors. Counsel for Appellant :- Sandeep Kumar Pandey,Lakshmi Kant Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed today in Court is taken on record. Rejoinder affidavit filed today in Court is also taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, 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 5.7.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Addl. Sessions Judge, Room No. 2, Bhadohi in Bail Application no. 508 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime no. 129 of 2019, under Sections 307/323/324/34 IPC IPC and 3(2) (5-A) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Aurai, DistrictBhadohi, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that appellant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the appellants has next submitted that as per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that the appellants alongwith two other coaccused have assaulted the victim, due to which Ramakant, Suryakant and Jayant Kumar have suffered injuries on their persons, As per the statement of victims Suryakant and Ramakant, Madhuraj is said to have assaulted the victim Suryakant by an axe on his head and when the other witnesses came to rescue him then the appellants alongwith Om Narayan assaulted the victims, due to which they suffered injuries. Learned counsel for the appellants has drawn the attention of the Court towards the injuries of the victim and as per the supplementary injury report, Ramakant has suffered a fracture injury on his left hand, however no abnormality has been detected in the injuries of other injured victims and as such the injuries cannot be said to be dangerous to life. Learned counsel for the appellants has next submitted that the appellants are in jail since 5.7.2019 and have no criminal history to their credit. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of appellants

¶9

fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering the witnesses and the conclusion of the trial will take a long time due to heavy dockets.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the first informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the fact that the appellants are in jail since 5.7.2019 and have no criminal history to their credit.

¶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 5.7.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Addl. Sessions Judge, Room No. 2, Bhadohi, is setaside and the bail application of appellant stands allowed.

¶13

Let the appellants Shyam Narain Dubey and Om Narain be released on bail in Case Crime No. 129 of 2019, under Sections 307/323/324/34 IPC IPC and 3(2) (5-A) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Aurai, District- Bhadohi, 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 appellants 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 appellants will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

(iii) The appellants 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 appellants to prison.

¶18

Order Date :- 18.10.2019 KU

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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.

Manohar Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ankit Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

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