Allowed

Adalati Nishad v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Jan 2020CRLA/5672/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Special Judge dismissed the bail application of Adalati Nishad in a case involving assault and alleged atrocities. In this appeal, the High Court set aside the lower court order and granted bail to the appellant, allowing him to be released on a personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 16.8.2019 was set aside and the appellant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

Adalati Nishad Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 54

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5672 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Adalati Nishad Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Arvind Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Shyamu Shukla

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Nobody is present on behalf of O.P. No.2 even in the revised call.

¶6

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of The Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'Act, 1989') has been filed on behalf of the appellant challenging the order dated 16.8.2019 passed by Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Gorakhpur, in Bail Application No. 2527 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 363 of 2018, under Sections 147, 307, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station - Gulariha, District - Gorakhpur, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.

¶7

As per prosecution version on 23.5.2018 at about 11.30 p.m. the applicant with co-accused Jitendra Nishad and Dharmendra and two unknown persons were digging earth from the agricultural field of the informant and on objection being made by the injured Rinku, they attacked on him with knife due to which he sustained injury.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant contended that no specific role of causing injury was assigned to the applicant in the FIR. There is a civil disputed about the land between the parties. An order was passed by the revenue court in favour of the appellant. In the same occurrence the appellant has also lodged report of non cognizable offence against the informant and his family members. Learned counsel for the appellant next submitted that the appellant is in jail since 6.8.2019 and the coaccused Jitendra Nishad had already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 7.1.2019 passed in Criminal Appeal No.4247 of 2018. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant has no criminal history.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the learned trial court.

¶10

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.

¶11

The impugned order dated 16.8.2019 passed by Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Gorakhpur is set-aside and the bail application of appellant stands allowed.

¶12

Let the appellant Adalati Nishad be released on bail in Case Crime No. 363 of 2018, under Sections 147, 307, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Gulariha, District- Gorakhpur, 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 :- 22.1.2020 T. Sinha

Adalati Nishad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adalati Nishad 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

Ram Sumiran Vs State of U.P.

Sitara Khatun Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jeetu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satyendra Yadav @ Halkutta Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Pappu Nishad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Asray Vs State of U.P. and Another