Allowed

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

Allahabad HC15 Jun 2021CRLA/160/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appellant's appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act against the rejection of his bail application. The court set aside the impugned order dated 10.11.2020 and directed the release of the appellant on bail with personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Rejected criminal appeal order dated 10.11.2020 set aside; appellant Bheem Singh released on bail with personal bond and two local sureties.

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

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 160 of 2021

¶3

Appellant :- Bheem Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Malik Juned Ahmad Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Abhishek Gupta

¶4

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶5

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶6

The present appeal under Section 14-A (2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed against the order dated 10.11.2020 whereby the bail application filed by the appellant has been rejected.

¶7

Counsel for the appellant argues that the FIR in question was lodged after about five years of the alleged incident, as such, there is delay and no plausible explanation has been given for the inordinate delay. Initially, in the FIR, it was alleged that the victim was married to the appellant and thus, the FIR was lodged under Section 498A, 304B and 506 IPC read with Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. During the course of the investigation, it came on record that there is no evidence of marriage in between the appellant and the alleged victim, as such, chargesheet was submitted against the appellant under Sections 302, 201, 506 IPC & 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST Act.

¶8

Counsel for the appellant has drawn my attention

¶9

to the statement of the informant which alleges that the FIR was lodged at the instance of neighbours. He further argues that the statement also alleges that the appellant has taken the alleged victim alone and murdered her, and has hidden her body somewhere. After the investigation, the chargesheet was filed, which records that there is no evidence and came to the conclusion that the appellant was married to the victim. On the basis of the statement so made by the informant, the chargesheet was filed under Sections 302, 201, 506 IPC & 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST Act. He further argues that the appellant is in custody since 28.8.2020 and has no criminal antecedents, which fact has not be disputed by the counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2.

¶10

Counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2, on the other hand, argues that although there is no proof of marriage, they were living together, and the chargesheet was wrongly not filed under Sections 498A, 304B and 506 IPC read with Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, however, the police authorities filed the chargesheet under Sections 302, 201, 506 IPC & 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST Act, as such, the appeal is liable to dismissed.

¶11

Considering the submissions made, the fact that the appellant is in custody since 28.8.2020 and on the basis of above evidence, as disclosed, and without recording any finding on the merits of the case including the fact that there is nothing on record to demonstrate that if the appellant is enlarged on bail, it would affect the trial adversely, the appeal deserves to be allowed.

¶12

The appeal is, accordingly, allowed and the

¶13

impugned judgment and order dated 10.11.2020 passed in bail application is set aside. Let the appellant Bheem Singh involved in Case Crime No. 588 of 2020, under Sections 302, 201, 506 IPC & 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST Act Police Station Phase 3, Gautambudh Nagar, District Gautambudh Nagar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶14

The appellant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶15

The appellant will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶16

The appellant will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶17

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court, Allahabad.

¶18

The concerned Court shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 15.6.2021

¶21

vinay

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bheem 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

Pawan Vs State of U.P.

Maikoo and Anothers Vs State of U.P.

Ram Kishun Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bablu Pal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Malkhan Vs State of U.P.

Divesh @ Devesh (Minor) Vs State of Up and Another