Allowed

Ram Asray v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Jan 2020CRLA/6519/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Special Criminal Court allowed an appeal against the rejection of a bail application under the SC/ST Act. The appellant, charged with violent offences including assault and hate speech, was granted bail on personal bond and sureties, reversing the lower court's decision.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed; the order rejecting bail was set aside, and the appellant was released on bond with two sureties subject to standard bail conditions.

Ram Asray Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 54

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6519 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Ram Asray Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Bir Bhan Singh,Birendra Singh,Kamal Dev Rai,Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Mohd. Monis,Rekha P Lal

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State and rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of appellant are taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellants against the order dated 1010.2019 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Fatehpur in Bail Application No. 1736 of 2019 in S.T. No.68 of 2019 (State Vs. Dhanraj Maurya & Ors), arising out of Case Crime No. 88 of 2019 for an offence under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(Da)(Dha) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Hathgaon, District - Fatehpur whereby the bail application of the appellant was rejected.

¶8

As per the First Information Report, the appellant along with three other accused came at the house of informant on Bolero Car and assaulted the informant and his wife with fists and lathi-danda. The injury report appended at page 20 indicates that there is pain in the right side of chest and contusion of 28x27c.m. the right side of the back of the chest. Contusion is also present on the right elbow joint and left elbow and joint. All the injuries are simple in nature except the injury no. 2, 3 and 4 which was caused hard and blunt. Subsequently, in the X- ray report no bony radiological abnormility was seen.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the injuries are simple in nature and the appellant in jail since 10.10.2019 and has no criminal history to his credit, as such, he may be released on bail.

¶10

On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record

¶12

including the impugned order carefully.

¶13

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the Court is of the opinion a case for bail has been made out. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal deserves to be allowed.

¶14

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.

¶15

Let the appellant namely Ram Asray involved in S.T. No.68 of 2019 (State Vs. Dhanraj Maurya & Ors), arising out of Case Crime No. 88 of 2019 under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(Da)(Dha) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Hathgaon, District - Fatehpur be released on bail furnishing on his personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶16

The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶19

The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶20

The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

6.Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶22

Order Date :- 22.1.2020 Akbar

Ram Asray v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Asray 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

Adalati Nishad 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