Allowed

Sanjeev Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 Oct 2021CRLA/81/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal appeal under the S.C./S.T. Act, the High Court set aside the Special Judge's order rejecting bail. The Court found the extra-judicial confession uncorroborated and insufficient to warrant rejection of bail, noting the accused had no criminal history and no flight risk.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing personal bonds and two sureties, subject to cooperation in trial.

Sanjeev Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 81 of 2021

¶3

Appellant :- Sanjeev Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (2) of S.C./S.T. Act as Amended, has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the order dated 05.11.2020, passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Farrukhabad in Case Crime No. 182 of 2020, under Sections - 302, 201 I.P.C. and Sections - 3(2)(5) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station - Kotwali Farrukhabad, District - Farrukhabad.

¶7

Contention raised on behalf of the appellant has been confined to the extent that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The only evidence appearing against the appellant is the extra judicial confession made to the maternal uncle of the deceased after one and a half month of the occurrence. The appellant is not named in the first information report. The F.I.R. is silent about the persons, who allegedly committed the offence in question. The extra judicial confession is a weak piece of evidence and cannot be acted upon unless corroborated in material particular and those material particulars at this stage of bail are lacking and it cannot be said that the extra judicial confession is supported by independent circumstance. The only allegation against the appellant is recovery of one mobile phone of the deceased, which recovery is denied and is not supported by any independent witness. 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 18.03.2020.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for 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 made out a case for bail.

¶12

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 05.11.2020, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set aside.

¶13

Let the accused-appellant - Sanjeev 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.

¶14

Order Date :- 28.10.2021 S Rawat

¶15

Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2021.10.30 14:50:21 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sanjeev Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjeev 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

Amir Vs State of U.P.

Anand Kumar @ Dablu Vs State of U.P and Another

Manish Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Sher Singh Vs State of U.P.

Dhruv Chandra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Virendra Pal Vs State of U.P.