Allowed

Guddu Yadav @ Gyanendra Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2021CRLA/603/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act, setting aside an order that had rejected the bail application of the appellant, Guddu Yadav, who was charged with rape and offences under the SC/ST Act.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the impugned order rejecting bail. Released the appellant on bail on personal bond and two sureties.

Guddu Yadav @ Gyanendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 603 of 2021

¶3

Appellant :- Guddu Yadav @ Gyanendra Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sudhakar Shukla

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Sudhakar Shukla, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (2) of SC/ST Act as Amended, has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 18.01.2021, passed by Special Judge SC/ST, Act, Fatehpur in Case Crime No. 267 of 2020, under Sections 376D, 354, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)da, dha and 3(2)5, 3(2)5 ka of SC/ST Act, P.S. - Lalauli, District - Fatehpur.

¶7

Core contention is that in this case, the role of rape has been assigned to another co-accused- Aman and he is the pricipal offender in this case. The applicant being co-villager on account of village partibandi , his name has been deliberately dragged in this case. No specific role has been assigned to the appellant for commission of the offence in question. In case the appellant is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail. The appellant has no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 09.10.2020.

¶8

Sri Sudhakar Shukla, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail of the appellant.

¶9

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 has been rejected, impugned herein this appeal.

¶10

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.

¶11

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

¶12

made out a case for bail.

¶13

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 18.01.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.

¶14

Let the accused-appellant - Guddu Yadav @ Gyanendra Singh involved in the aforesaid case crime number for the aforesaid offences 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 :- 19.7.2021 S Rawat

Guddu Yadav @ Gyanendra Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu Yadav @ Gyanendra Singh 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

Saksham Sirauthiya Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arvind Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sonu @ Shailendra Vs State of U.P.

Brijendra @ Bhajju Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ram Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another