Allowed

Anand Tiwari v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Dec 2021CRLA/3145/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act and set aside an order of the Special Court that had rejected the appellant's bail application pending trial for offences under IPC and the SC/ST Act.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the order dated 19.07.2021 rejecting bail. Released the appellant on bail subject to conditions of bond, sureties, and cooperation in trial.

Anand Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3145 of 2021

¶3

Appellant :- Anand Tiwari Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sudhir Kumar (Chandraul) Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Despite service of notice on respondent no. 2, none has appeared on his behalf to oppose the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is being proceeded on merits.

¶6

Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar Chandraul, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Ankit Srivastav, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 19.07.2021, passed by learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Basti, in Case Crime No. 61 of 2021, under Sections - 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (r) and 3(2)(V) S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station - Dubaulia, District - Basti , whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.

¶8

At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits, against the FIR lodged on 21.04.2021, the appellant is in confinement since 05.06.2021; the appellant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case he is not shown to have unduly evaded arrest; the appellant has no criminal history; chargesheet has already been submitted yet, trial has not commenced. Therefore, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial; on prima facie basis, it has been submitted, undisputedly,

¶9

the alleged victim girl (prosecutrix) was about 20 years of age. She had formed relationship with the appellant about 1 year earlier. In such facts, it has been submitted, the parties have formed consensual relationship which has now failed giving rise to the present prosecution. No other material in the shape of photographs or video has been recovered during investigation. Also, it has been submitted, the allegations of violation under SC/ST Act are general and made to lend colour to the story.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, at present, the order passed by the learned court below rejecting the bail application filed by the appellant, cannot be sustained.

¶12

Without drawing any inference as to facts, in view of the above noted facts & submissions and having regard to the status of the evidence, as has been shown to exist on record, let the appellant be enlarged on bail at this stage.

¶13

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 19.07.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.

¶14

Let the accused-appellant, namely, Anand Tiwari , involved in the aforesaid crime 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.

¶15

Order Date :- 10.12.2021 Abhilash

Anand Tiwari v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Tiwari 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

Mukesh Kashyap Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajeev Kumar Prajapati Vs State of U.P.and Another

Abhishek Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Roshan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Movin Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Kamta Prasad Vs State of U.P. and Another