Allowed

Lullar v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC1 Sept 2021CRLA/1920/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Special Judge rejected bail for the appellant in a SC/ST atrocity case. The High Court allowed the bail appeal, setting aside the rejection order. The Court noted that a co-accused in similar circumstances had already been granted bail, found no justification in the lower court's reasoning for denial, and directed the release of the appellant on bail subject to furnishing bonds and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order of 15.03.2021 setting aside; accused-appellant released on bail on furnishing personal bonds and two sureties.

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

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1920 of 2021

¶3

Appellant :- Lullar Respondent :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Satya Prakash Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, 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 15.03.2021 passed by Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, Sonbhadra, in Special Session Trial No.110 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No.78 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307/34 I.P.C. and 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, 1989, P.S. Ghorawal, District Sonbhadra.

¶7

Contention, in brief, is that similarly circumstanced co-accused Balendra @ Balendu has already been admitted to bail by coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal No.5 of 2021 on 17.02.2021, copy whereof as appears is on page nos. 213 and 214 of the bail application. The case of the present applicant is identical to that of co-accused who has already been admitted to bail. In case the appellant is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail. The appellant has no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 20.07.2019.

¶8

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

¶12

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 15.03.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.

¶13

Let the accused-appellant Lullar 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.

¶14

Order Date :- 1.9.2021 rkg

Lullar v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lullar 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

Smt Rinki Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dori Lal Vs State of U.P.

Hari Mohan Vs State of Up and Anotehr

Bhoora and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Khursheed and 6 Others Vs the State of U.P. and Another

Shahbe Aalam Alias Shahabe and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others