Dismissed

Shivam Pandey @ Golu v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2021CRLA/2226/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the criminal appeal seeking bail in a case involving Section 147/148 IPC read with Section 3(2)(5) of the SC/ST Act. Upholding the impugned order, the court found sufficient evidence of a joint assault on a government servant, finding no good reason to exercise discretion in favor of the appellant. The appeal was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The criminal appeal was dismissed; the impugned bail rejection order was affirmed as correct.

Shivam Pandey @ Golu Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2226 of 2021 Appellant :- Shivam Pandey @ Golu Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Appellant :- Ashish Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A.

¶4

This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed for setting-aside the impugned order dated 19.05.2021 passed by learned Special Judge/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Maharajganj in Bail Application No.504 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime no.15 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 352, 452, 333, 353, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Sinduriya, District-Maharajganj.

¶5

A perusal of the FIR shows that the appellant is not named in the FIR but the opposite party no.2 has identified the appellant and in 161 Cr.P.C., he has taken the name of the appellant with the specific allegation that the appellant along with others have jointly assaulted upon the concerned S.I. while performing his official duty. The injury report too corroborates the injuries sustained by the informant. It is totally unacceptable that a ruffian would attack a government servant while performing the government job.

¶6

Under the circumstances, I do not find any good reason to exercise my power in favour of the appellant.

¶7

Hence, the present criminal appeal stands dismissed. The order impugned dated 19.05.2021 passed by learned Special Judge/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Maharajganj in Bail Application No.504 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime no.15 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 352, 452, 333, 353, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Sinduriya, District-Maharajganj does not suffer from any illegality or irregularity and is hereby affirmed.

¶8

Order Date :- 9.9.2021 Sumit S

¶9

Digitally signed by RAHUL CHATURVEDI Date: 2021.09.13 11:37:56 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shivam Pandey @ Golu v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivam Pandey @ Golu v. State of U.P. and Anr.

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

Naeem Vs State of U.P.

Durga Prasad and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Manoj Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Junaid Vs State of U.P. and Another

Alok Chaturvedi Vs State of U.P.