Allowed

Guddu Vishwakarma v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2021CRLA/1301/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal concerning the SC/ST Act, the High Court allowed the appeal against the rejection of bail. The court set aside the impugned order and released the appellant on bail subject to furnishing personal bonds and two sureties, emphasizing the complicity of the accused and the identical circumstances of a co-accused who was already granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 23.02.2021 setting aside; appellant released on bail with personal bonds and two sureties subject to cooperation in trial.

Guddu Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P.and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1301 of 2021

¶3

Appellant :- Guddu Vishwakarma Respondent :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sarvesh Kumar Dubey,Gaurav Tiwari,Prashant Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (2) of SC/ST Act as Amended, has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 23.02.2021, passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Allahabad in Case Crime No. 635 of 2020, under Sections - 323, 504, 353, 332, 307, 452, 120B I.P.C. and Section - 3(2)V, Police Station - Khuldabad, District - Allahabad.

¶7

Contention, in brief, is that similarly circumstanced co-accused Tufail Ahmad has already been admitted to bail by coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 1488 of 2021 on 17.6.2021. The case of the present appellant is identical to that of co-accused, who has already been admitted to bail by coordinate Bench of this Court. In case the appellant is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail. The appellant is languishing in jail since 27.12.2020.

¶8

Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.

¶9

I have considered the rival submissions so made and having gone through the entire record including the order by which, bail application of the appellant has been rejected, impugned herein this appeal.

¶10

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

¶11

Thus, in view of the above and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the evidence,

¶12

complicity of accused, I am of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail.

¶13

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 23.02.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.

¶14

Let the accused-appellant - Guddu Vishwakarma involved in the aforesaid case crime number for the aforesaid offences be released on bail on his furnishing personal bonds and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the condition that appellant shall cooperate in the trial and will not jump the bail.

¶15

Order Date :- 2.8.2021 S Rawat

Guddu Vishwakarma v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu Vishwakarma 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

Pradeep Verma Vs State of Up and Another

Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.

Indresh Rai Vs State of U.P.

Farhat Jahan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suneel Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajeev Ranjan Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another