Allowed

Kali Prasad Tiwari v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2022/1914/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge allowed the criminal appeal against the refusal of bail under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, holding that the lower court failed to appreciate material facts. The judge observed the underlying dispute was civil in nature.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 16.11.2021 refusing bail set aside; Appellant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions.

Kali Prasad Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1914 of 2021 Appellant :- Kali Prasad Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Mohd. Raziullah,Aruna Kumari,Farhan Alam Osmany Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶4

This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 14A (2) the Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to set aside the order dated 16.11.2021 passed in Bail application No. 133/2021, arising out of case crime No. 89/2019, under Sections 504/506/420 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(D), Dha of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Malipur, District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶5

Learned counsel for the appellant while pressing the appeal submits that, the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing as claimed by the prosecution has been committed by the appellant.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant-appellant submits that name of the complainant's wife has been mutated in the revenue record on the basis of sale deed executed by the applicant. It is next submitted on behalf of the applicant-appellant that after the death of the complainant's wife it has been in favour of her sons which has never been opposed by the applicants, therefore, no case under Section 420 I.P.C. is made out. Even otherwise the dispute is purely of civil nature which can be adjudicated by the competent Court of law in civil suit and this cannot be adjudicated in the criminal proceedings.

¶7

It is further submitted that the co-accused namely Awadhesh Kumar Tiwari has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 22.06.2021 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 425/2020.

¶8

It is further submitted that, the appellant is languishing in jail in this matter since 16.01.2021. Charge-sheet in the matter has already been submitted. There is no likelihood that the appellant-applicant after release on bail may flee from the process of law or will misuse the liberty of bail granted by this Court.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail, however, could not dispute the fact that the matter is purely of civil nature.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, without

¶11

commenting upon merits, I am of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. In view of above, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside.

¶12

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order dated 16.11.2021 passed in Bail application No. 133/2021, arising out of case crime No. 89/2019, under Sections 504/506/420 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(D), Dha of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Malipur, District Ambedkar Nagar, is set aside.

¶13

Let the appellant-applicant/ Kali Prasad Tiwari involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

(iii) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(iv) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.

¶18

(v) 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.

¶19

(vi) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial 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.

¶20

The pending application, if any, too stands disposed of.

¶21

Order Date :- 11.1.2022/R.C.

Kali Prasad Tiwari v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kali Prasad Tiwari 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

Mohd Shadab and Ors. Vs State of Up and Anr.

Sakeena Bano and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Deptt Lko and Anr.

Ravindra Kumar Vs State of U.Pthru Prin Secy Home and Another

Vikas Singh Alias Rajan Singh and Anoth Vs State of U.P.Thru. Its Prin.Secry.Deptt.Home Civilsecrt.Lko and Anoth

Govind Prasad Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Deptt Govt of U.P Civil Secy and Anoth

Smt. Farzana and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Homeand Another