Allowed

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

Allahabad HC6 Jan 2021CRLA/1863/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Appeal allows the appellant's request to set aside the order rejecting his bail application. The Special Judge had rejected bail citing a confessional statement implicating the appellant as the mastermind of a conspiracy to loot and murder. The High Court held that conspiracy determination was for trial and allowed bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 10.2.2020 rejecting bail set aside. Appellant released on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to cooperate in trial.

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

¶1

Court No. - 88

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1863 of 2020

¶3

Appellant :- Rohit Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mohd. Ashraf Abbasi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,P.K. Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard Mohd. Adhraf Abbasi, learned Counsel for the appellantapplicant, Sri Suraj Kumar Singh, learned Advodate, holding brief of Sri P.K. Singh, learned counsel for the complainant, 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, 2015 has been preferred by the appellant- Rohit Singh with the prayer to set aside the order dated 10.2.2020 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Kanpur Nagar in Bail Application No. 3 of 2020 rejecting the bail application in Case Crime No. 1161 of 2019 under Sections 302, 394, 411, 120B I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, P.S.- Kalyanpur, District- Kanpur Nagar.

¶7

Allegations in the first information report are that the informant found the deadbody of the deceased lying in the pool of blood inside the house when he entered the house after coming from the field. Applicant's name came to be incorporated in present case crime number with addition of certain Sections after recovery made from the co-accused, of some money, mobile and blood stained shirt. It is in the confessional statement of the accused that the applicant before this Court who is the tenant of the informant, was taken as a mastermind for hatching conspiracy to commit loot and murder as both of them were unemployed and were in alleged dire need of money.

¶8

It has been submitted by learned Counsel for the appellantapplicant that the appellant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated for ulterior motive. It is further argued that except the confessional statement given before the police which is an extra judicial statement, there is no other evidence available with the prosecution to prosecute the applicant in the present case. He has been implicated in the present case only on the basis of being tenant in the house, otherwise there is no statement coming forth to the count that applicant had executed the crime. It is next submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history. It is also submitted that though the charge sheet has been submitted in the present case, but in the wake of

¶9

heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no chance of any early conclusion of trial. The applicant is languishing in jail since 7.12.2019.

¶10

Per contra, the appeal has been opposed vehemently by the counsel for the complainant as well as the learned A.G.A. on the ground that it is the confessional statement in which the name of the applicant has been taken and the complicity of the applicant cannot be ruled out being the tenant of the house of the informant.

¶11

In reply it is argued that question of conspiracy will be determined at the stage of trial when the evidence will be lead by the prosecution and there is no reason to presume the conspiracy at this stage.

¶12

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-applicant has been rejected, impugned herein this appeal 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.

¶13

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 10.2.2020 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 6.1.2021 Deepika

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit 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

Sandeep Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rvendra Singh @ Hariom Kachhi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ehsan Vs State of U.P.and Another

Omkar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nitin Patel Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Smt. Ruby Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and Another