Dismissed

Matarua @ Vinod v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2023CRLA/10318/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal appeal under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act challenging a bail rejection order in a murder case, the High Court affirmed the trial court's decision, finding that the facts and circumstances made it unfit for bail and the appeal lacked merit.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Appeal No. 10318 of 2023 was dismissed; the order rejecting bail was upheld.

Matarua @ Vinod Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:229754

¶2

Court No. - 85

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10318 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Matarua @ Vinod Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Lalit Kumar Srivastava,Km. Khushi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sarthak Singh,Vimlesh Kumar

¶5

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Sarthak Singh, learned counsel for the informant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶7

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 05.10.2023 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Chitrakoot in Bail Application No. 1078 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 230 of 2023, under Sections 302 I.P.C. and Section 3 (2) (V) of SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Karvi, District Chitrakoot.

¶8

As per the FIR the case of the prosecution is that on 15.04.2023 at around 9.00 am the appellant and other co-accused had taken away the son of the informant Sonu and over a dispute of Rs.200/- they had beaten the Sonu and committed his murder.

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The only allegation against the appellant is that informant had seen him in the company of deceased before his death. As per the averment made in the F.I.R. the dead body was thrown into the pond while the dead body was recovered from Chabutara of pond. It is also submitted that as per the postmortem report cause of death was Axphyxia as a result of anti-mortem strangulation. It is further submitted that no other injury was noted on the person of the deceased while there is allegation against the appellant that he had beaten him. It is further submitted that no motive has been attributed to the appellant to commit the crime. The witnesses of fact disclosed the prosecution story in two fold while in the F.I.R. there is no whisper about the subsequent incident which took place at around 12 pm on the date of incident

¶10

wherein it is alleged that deceased was called by the appellant for smoking and thereafter the dead body of the deceased was found. The statement of Bauwa was not recorded by the Investigating officer during investigation while as per prosecution appellant and deceased were seen smoking together at his shop. The appellant is languishing in jail since 23.04.2023 having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. assisted by learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail contending that at the time of granting the bail to co-accused Sarvan @ Sharvan Kumar, the role of present appellant was distinguished. Since the appellant is main accused and as per post-mortem report the cause of death was Axphyxia as a result of anti-mortem strangulation. A rope which was used in the crime was also recovered near the dead body of the deceased. Hence, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

¶12

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment,, I do not find it fit case for bail.

¶13

Since the trial court has passed the impugned order after appreciating the evidence available on record, there is no occasion to interfere with the finding of fact recorded by the trial court, hence, the present criminal appeal lacks merit and deserves to be dismissed.

¶14

Accordingly, the criminal appeal is dismissed.

¶15

Order Date :- 4.12.2023 AKT

¶16

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Matarua @ Vinod v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Matarua @ Vinod 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

Smt. Komal and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Nagma and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Smt Jyoti @ Jainam and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Israyal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt.Arti Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Visheshan @ Golu Vs State of U.P. and Another