Allowed

Sandeep Kumar Dangi Thakur v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC28 Jan 2021CRLA/2756/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The special judge rejected the bail application of the appellant. The High Court, in a criminal appeal, found the groundings for rejection unconvincing and set aside the order, releasing the appellant on bail.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order rejecting bail is set aside; the accused is released on personal bond and two sureties subject to cooperation in trial and not jumping bail.

Sandeep Kumar Dangi Thakur Vs State of U.P.and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 88

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2756 of 2020

¶3

Appellant :- Sandeep Kumar Dangi Thakur Respondent :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ganga Bhushan Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Om Prakash

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶6

This Criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 5th June, 2020 passed by Special Judge, SC/ ST Act, Jhansi in Bail Application No.- 639 of 2020 (Sandeep Kumar Dangi Thakur vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No.- 642 of 2019 under Sections 376, 328, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station- Nawabad, District- Jhansi.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the first information report some intoxicated substance was poured into the tea of the informant at her residence by the appellant and thereafter the informant was taken to several places where she was sexually assaulted and she was also sold for a sum of Rs. 1 lac but somehow she managed to escape.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is also argued that the informant herself is not having good character and the version of the first information report is not corroborate by the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and it is also not clear that as to who intoxicated the informant because, it is alleged, wife of the informant, namely Babali, who had administered intoxicated substance to her in tea and that too in her house. It is also argued that the charge sheet exonerated the Babali in the present case. It is next argued that there is no criminal history to the credit of the applicant. It is further submitted that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no chance of any early conclusion of trial. The appellant is languishing in jail since 23th January, 2020.

¶9

Learned Additional Government Advocate has though opposed the bail of the appellant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

¶10

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.

¶11

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.

¶12

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.

¶13

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 5th June, 2020 rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.

¶14

Let the accused-appellant, namely, Sandeep Kumar Dangi Thakur 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 :- 28.1.2021 Atmesh

Sandeep Kumar Dangi Thakur v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Kumar Dangi Thakur 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 Kumar Maurya Alias Pintu Maurya Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Sandeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gyan Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanju and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Vikas Yadav @ Puttoo Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Niraj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others