Allowed

Deena Nath v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Dec 2021CRLA/432/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal appeal against bail rejection in a cheating and forgery matter was allowed. The court set aside the order rejecting bail and released the appellant on personal bonds and two sureties, subject to cooperating in the trial.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail with personal bonds and two sureties; impugned rejection order set aside.

Deena Nath Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 432 of 2021

¶3

Appellant :- Deena Nath Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rajesh Kumar Chaudhary,Ashish Dwivedi,Ganesh Shanker Srivastava,Narsingh Pandey,Rahul Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Vipin Kumar Dwivedi

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Anil Kumar Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Rahul Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Vipin Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the informant; Sri Janardan Prakash, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

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 16.01.2021, passed by learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Basti, in Case Crime No. 289 of 2019, under Sections - 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(Da) S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station - Kalwari, District - Basti , whereby bail application of the appellant has been rejected.

¶7

At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits, against the FIR lodged on 29.12.2019, the appellant is in confinement since 07.01.2021; the appellant claims to have cooperated in the investigation; the appellant has no criminal history; chargesheet has already been submitted yet, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial; on prima facie basis, it has been submitted, the FIR allegations are plainly false. The dispute between the parties has arisen owing to the fact that the first informant was opposed to the sale deed executed by his father Mewa Lal. The appellant is the marginal witness.

¶8

Undisputedly, before executing the sale deed, permission was sought and it was granted by the District Magistrate, Basti, vide order dated 25.02.2020. No application has been filed to recall that order. Then, reference has been made to the fact that Mewa Lal in his statement recorded during investigation admitted the fact that he had executed the sale deed but he disputed the payment received against the same. Arising therefrom a suit for cancellation of the sale deed is also stated to be pending. Thus, the real dispute between the parties is civil which is already engaging the attention of the Court. Also, it has been submitted, the allegations of violation of SC/ST Act are general and made to lend colour to the story.

¶9

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

¶10

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.

¶11

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.

¶12

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 16.01.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.

¶13

Let the accused-appellant, namely, Deena Nath , 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.

¶14

Order Date :- 17.12.2021 Abhilash

Deena Nath v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deena Nath 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gore Lal Vs Staten of Up and Another

Darvesh Fauji Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kuldeep @ Vikram Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aasif Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashsih Vs State of U.P. and Another

Harish Chandra Vs State of U.P. and Another