Allowed

Ankit v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 Jan 2021CRLA/431/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Appeal No. 431 of 2021, the High Court of Allahabad set aside the Special Court's order rejecting bail. The court found a prima facie case for bail, allowing the appellant's release on personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions regarding court attendance and fixed dates.

What did the court decide?

Impugned bail rejection order set aside. Appellant released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties.

Ankit Vs State of U.P. and Another — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 431 of 2021

¶3

Appellant :- Ankit Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vikrant Rana Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

¶6

The present criminal appeal under Section - 14A (2) of the SC/ST Act, 1989 has been filed by the appellant against the impugned bail rejection order dated 07.1.2021 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Meerut in Bail Application No. 5258 of 2020 (Ankit Versus State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 936 of 2020, under Sections 376 & 506 IPC and Section 3(2) (V) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station - Kankerkheda, District Meerut with the prayer to allow the present appeal setting aside the impugned bail rejection order.

¶7

The First Information Report of this incident was lodged by the opposite party No. 2 herself (victim) against accused appellant. It was mentioned in the First Information Report that the opposite party No. 2 was living with the present accused in live in relationship for the last five years and she has further alleged in the FIR that the present accused is not solemnizing marriage with the complainant.

¶8

The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the appellant is that appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the alleged victim was living with the present accused appellant out of her own sweet will and was in consensual relationship with the present accused. Next submission made by the learned counsel is that the victim is major and the accused appellant has been falsely nominated in this case to illegally harass him with an oblique motive. Lastly, it is argued that the appellant is in jail since 04.10.2020 and that in case appellant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Shri Chandra Veer Singh, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 as well as the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention of the applicant and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.

¶11

Accordingly, the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is hereby set aside.

¶12

The Criminal Appeal is allowed.

¶13

Let appellant - Ankit involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of

¶14

court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶15

(1). The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law;

¶16

(2). The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶17

(3). In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court may initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(4). The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the learned counsel for the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶20

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall 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.

¶21

Order Date :- 29.1.2021 LBY

Ankit v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit 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

Shiv Mangal Vs State

Surendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Rakesh Yadav Vs State of Up and Another

Madhur Saxena Vs State of U.P. and Another

Girdhari Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Pankaj Yadav Vs State of U.P.