Allowed

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

Allahabad HC3 May 2019CRLA/805/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act, challenging the refusal of bail in an IPC case, was allowed. The Special Judge's order denying bail was set aside, and the appellant was directed to be released on bail with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 12.11.2018 set aside; appellant released on bail by executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties.

Jeeshan Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 805 of 2018

¶3

Appellant :- Jeeshan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Dr. Arun Srivastav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed in the Court today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, 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 12.11.2018 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Pilibhit in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 60 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime no. 991 of 2017, under Sections 452, 376, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, P.S. Puranpur, district-Pilibhit, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to village factional politics. He next submitted that in the first information report allegation of rape has been made against the appellant and his three real brothers by the victim, who is a married lady aged about 20 years. But the victim in her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. (Annexures- 3 & 4) has made allegation of rape only against the present appellant. He further submitted that the medical report of the victim does not corroborate the allegation of rape. No marks of violence or injury were found on her body by the doctor who had examined her. He lastly submitted that the appellant, who is in jail since 11.10.2017 and has no criminal antecedents to his credit is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim has fully supported the prosecution case in her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., hence he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Without commenting on the merits of the case, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence, period of

¶11

detention, manner in which offence has been committed and severity of punishment, 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 12.11.2018 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Pilibhit is hereby set aside.

¶13

Let the applicant-appellant, Jeeshan be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶14

Order Date :- 3.5.2019 Faridul

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

Chandan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Uma Shankar Singh Alias Uma Shankar Singh Thakur and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Surya Kant Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Girish and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Fijan Ahmad Vs State of Up and Another

Suraj Vs State of U.P. and Another