Allowed

Ram Autar v. State of Upa Dn Another

Allahabad HC27 Aug 2021CRLA/821/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act was allowed. The High Court set aside the Special Judge's order rejecting the bail application regarding offences under the IPC and SC/ST Act, granting bail to the appellant on surety bonds.

What did the court decide?

The appellant was released on bail upon furnishing personal bonds and two sureties, conditional upon cooperation in the trial and not absconding.

Ram Autar Vs State of Upa Dn Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 821 of 2021

¶3

Appellant :- Ram Autar Respondent :- State Of Upa Dn Another Counsel for Appellant :- Virendra Singh,Deo Anand Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Dinesh Mishra,Prashant Kumar Tripathi

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant 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 05.02.2021 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Special Judge (D.A.A. Act), Chitrakoot, in Case Crime No.870 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)Va SC/ST Act, P.S. Karwi Kotwali Nagar, District Chitrakoot.

¶7

Contention, in brief, is that the accusation is absolutely false. In this case the appellant claims to have been falsely implicated on account of enmity and village party-bandi. There is no iota of evidence that may justify the involvement of appellant in the very commission of the offence. The criminal history of the appellant has been duly explained in the body of the bail application as well as in the supplementary affidavit. In case the appellant is admitted to bail, there is no possibility of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail. The appellant is languishing in jail since 05.02.2021.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. as well as counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant and claimed that in this case there are number of injured persons, however, they could not dispute the fact that injuries are simple in nature.

¶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

¶11

appellant.

¶12

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.

¶13

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 05.02.2021, rejecting the bail of the appellant is set-aside.

¶14

Let the accused-appellant, Ram Autar 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 :- 27.8.2021 Vikas

Ram Autar v. State of Upa Dn Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Autar v. State of Upa Dn 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

Shiv Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kamal Singh Vs State of Up and Another

Bablu and 2 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Smt Rinki Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dori Lal Vs State of U.P.

Hari Mohan Vs State of Up and Anotehr