Allowed

Manoj v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2021CRLA/7680/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Appeal filed against bail rejection under SC/ST Act. The court allowed the appeal, granted bail to the appellant Manoj, and set aside the impugned order dated 05.11.2019, subject to strict conditions ensuring trial conclusion and court appearance.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions regarding trial conclusion, court attendance, and prohibition of adjournment seeking.

Manoj Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7680 of 2019

¶3

Appellant :- Manoj Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Ved Prakash Ojha Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

Pleadings between the parties have been exchanged.

¶7

This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed for setting-aside the bail rejection order dated 05.11.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional District & Sessions Judge, Lalitpur in Bail Application No.565 of 2019 (Manoj Vs. State of U.P) in Case Crime no. 56 of 2019, under Sections 323, 325 and 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(Da/Dha) of SC/ST Act, Police StationJakhlaun, District-Lalitpur.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is named in the FIR. There is general role of assault upon Mukesh and Manoj both by lathi, & danda causing fracture to the injured. Keeping in view the period of incarceration undergone by him. The appellant is languishing in jail since 17.10.2019. There is no chance of concluding the trial in near future.

¶9

Learned A.G.A as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

The submission made by learned counsel for the appellant, prima facie, is quite appealing and convincing for the purpose of bail only.

¶11

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, taking into account the manner and mode in which the appellant has been summoned and the period of detention already undergone, and also without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail.

¶12

Let the appellant-Manoj, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

(i) THE APPELLANT WOULD FULLY COOPERATE IN THE CONCLUSION OF TRIAL WITHIN ONE YEAR AND ANY TEMPERING OR WILLING TACTICS ON THE PART OF THE APPELLANT TO DELAY THE TRIAL WOULD WARRANT THE AUTOMATIC CANCELLATION OF BAIL.

¶14

(ii) THE APPELLANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR EVIDENCE WHEN 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.

¶15

(iii) 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 IPC.

¶16

(iv) IN CASE, THE APPELLANT MISUSE THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPELLANT 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 IPC.

¶17

(v) THE APPELLANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION OF THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPELLANT IS DELIBERATE OR WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THEN IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT SUCH DEFAULT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PROCEED AGAINST HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶18

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the appellant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this court.

¶19

Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned order dated order dated 05.11.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional District & Sessions Judge, Lalitpur, is hereby set aside.

¶20

Order Date :- 9.9.2021 Abhishek Sri.

Manoj v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj v. State of U.P. and Anr.

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

Naeem Vs State of U.P.

Durga Prasad and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Saurabh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shivam Pandey @ Golu Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Junaid Vs State of U.P. and Another

Alok Chaturvedi Vs State of U.P.