Allowed

Avne @ Avnish v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Jul 2021CRLA/672/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal appeal against the rejection of a bail application filed under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The Court quashed the earlier order and released the appellant on bail with specific conditions regarding his appearance in court and conduct, noting the length of the trial and complicity factors.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 22.01.2021 rejecting the bail application was quashed; appellant released on personal bond and two sureties with conditions on attendance and conduct.

Avne @ Avnish Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 672 of 2021

¶3

Appellant :- Avne @ Avnish Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ajay Kumar Dwivedi,Arun Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Shiva Kant Dubey

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Shiva Kant Dubey, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 are connected through virtual mode and learned AGA for the State, perused the material on record.

¶6

The instant criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed challenging the order dated 22.01.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act whereby learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Firozabad has rejected the bail application no. 204 of 2021 (Avne @ Avnish Vs. State of U.P.) under Sections 323, 452, 386, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Narkhi, District Firozabad.

¶7

Submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant are as follows :-

¶8

(a) The appellant/applicant is not even named in the FIR, nor any derogatory utterance relating to the caste related remarks were mentioned in the FIR.

¶9

(b) The name of the appellant/applicant figure up after one month of the incident in the confessional statement of co-accused Neeraj Diwakar, the named accused.

¶10

¶11

(d) No amount by way of alleged exhortation was ever received by the applicant.

¶12

Per contra, Sri Shiva Kant Dubey, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that though the appellant/applicant is not named in the FIR but applicant/appellant and the main accused Neeraj Diwakar resides jointly and the present appellant/applicant has actively participated in the commission of the offence.

¶13

Learned AGA also pointed that there are criminal history of three cases to the credit of present appellant/applicant.

¶14

Sri Ajay Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the appellant/applicant submits that in paragraph 9 of the affidavit, he has explained the criminal antecedent of the applicant/appellant, which is only after lodging of the present FIR and all the three cases were pasted against the appellant/applicant. Learned counsel for the appellant lastly submitted that the appellant/applicant is languishing in jail since 16.12.2020.

¶15

Taking into account the totality of the circumstances and the complicity of the appellant/applicant in the commission of the offence,the way and the

¶16

manner by which the complicity of the applicant allegedly shown, the appellant/applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail and keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, hence, the impugned order dated 22.01.2021 passed by learned Sessions Judge, SC/ST Act, Firozabad rejecting the bail application of the appellant/applicant is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶17

Let appellant/applicant-Avne @ Avnish , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶18

(i). The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence, if 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;

¶19

(ii). 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;

¶20

(iii). 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 shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

(iv) 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.

¶22

On the above terms and condition the present appeal stands allowed.

¶23

Order Date :- 6.7.2021 Abhishek Sri.

Avne @ Avnish v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avne @ Avnish 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

Dharmendra@ Patariya Vs State of U.P.

Sahid and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sant Ram Vs State of U.P.

Nadeem Khan Vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Patel Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raja Sah Alias Chunmun Vs State of U.P. and Another