Allowed

Randheer Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Jan 2021CRLA/1232/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed this criminal appeal under the SC/ST Act, 1989, set aside the order rejecting bail, and remanded appellant to be released on bail with personal sureties subject to standard conditions, noting State had not prompted convictions against him despite vehement opposition.

What did the court decide?

Impugned bail rejection order set aside; appellant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties.

Randheer Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 88

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1232 of 2020

¶3

Appellant :- Randheer Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, learned Counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶6

This Criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant- Randheer Singh with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 18.01.2020 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Bareilly in Bail Application No. 4601915 of 2019 in Case Crime No. 315 of 2019 under Sections 147, 148, 364, 452, 323, 504, 307, 34 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)Da, Dha, 3(2)V SC/ST Act, P.S.Bhojipura, District- Bareilly.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the first information report, the accused persons entered the house of complainant and abused with castiest remarks. It is further alleged that after assault they forcibly taken away his wife along with them with an intention to kill her.

¶8

It has been submitted by learned Counsel for the appellantapplicant that the appellant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated for ulterior motives. It is also argued that the alleged victim whose kidnapping is alleged in the FIR, is in fact the daughter of present applicant and is minor, who actually accompanied the applicant and thus, it is argued that the FIR has been lodged to harass the applicant. It is also argued that the co accused Mahipal Singh has already been granted bail in this case by a coordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 12.02.2020 in Criminal Appeal No. 5243 of 2019. It is further argued by the learned counsel that the applicant has no criminal history to his credit. However, in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no chance of any early conclusion of trial. The applicants are languishing in jail since 04.07.2019.

¶9

Though the appeal has been opposed vehemently by the learned A.G.A. but he could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶10

I have considered the rival submissions so made and having gone through the entire record including the order by which,

¶11

bail application of the appellant-applicant has been rejected, impugned herein this appeal.

¶12

Nothing convincing has been argued on behalf of the State so as to justify and sustain the order passed by the court below rejecting the bail application of the appellant.

¶13

Thus, in view of the above and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the evidence, complicity of accused, I am of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail.

¶14

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 18.01.2020 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.

¶15

Let the above named accused-appellant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that applicant shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.

¶16

The concerned Court/Authority/Official is further directed to verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶17

Order Date :- 13.1.2021 IrfanUddin

Randheer Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Randheer Singh 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

Nripat Vishwkarama Vs State of Up and Another

Dev Gupta Vs State of Up and Another

Chhotu Yadav @ Deepak Yadav Vs State of Up and Another

Chand Alam Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Naushad Vs State of U.P. Nd Another

Rajendra Bajaj Vs State of U.P. and Another