Dismissed

Santosh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 May 2023CRLA/2328/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Appeal filed to set aside an order rejecting a bail application in a case involving alleged caste-based violence. The appellant claimed false implication, but the court found no reason to doubt the allegations. The bail appeal was dismissed, and the trial was directed to conclude within one year.

What did the court decide?

Bail application stay of the lower court order rejected and trial concluded within one year.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:120491 RESERVED ON 26.5.2023

¶2

DELIVERED ON 29.5.2023

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2328 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Santosh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Dhanraj Singh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Anjeet Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Vakalatnama filed by Shri Anjeet Singh on behalf of the opposite party no.2 is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Shri Dhanraj Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant; Shri Anjeet Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant, Santosh to set aside the impugned order dated 8.2.2023, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST(P.A.) Act/Additional Session Judge,Fatehpur has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 356 of 2022 , under Sections 323,504,304 IPC and Sections 3(1)Da,3(1)Dha,3(2)5A, 3(2) (5) SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Husenganj, District Fatehpur.

¶9

There is allegation in the First Information Report that his son Sandeep was being beaten by accused, Pappu,ShivBhola, Kallu and Santosh for some reason on

¶10

21.12.2022 at about 9 P.M. by legs,fists and lathi, danda.When informant and his daughter went to save him accused persons had also beaten and abused them.His son Sandeep and daughter, Lakshmi Devi suffered injuries and were being treated in the hospital.Subsequently his son, Sandeep died.The casue of death of the deceased was found to be shock and haemorrhage as a result of antemortem injuries.

¶11

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that deceased was alcoholic and was addicted to Ganja.For the purpose of money to purchase alcohol and ganja he used to often enter into dispute with people.The deceased was beaten by some unknown persons and he suffered injuries and died. The appellant and co-accused have been falsely implicated in this case.Appellant is in jail since 24.11.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submitted that 12 antemortem injuries were found on the body of the deceased in the postmortem report.In the statements of the witnesses recorded by the investigating officer they have fully supported the allegations made in the First Information Report.They have further submitted that implication of the appellant has wrongly been made under section 304 I.P.C. when all the accused persons had murdered the deceased by causing 12 injuries which proved fatal for his life . They further submitted that in

¶13

2 of 3

¶14

case the appellant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶15

After hearing the rival contentions, this Court finds that four persons, including the appellant, are alleged to have beaten the deceased and he suffered 12 injuries on different parts of the body and died. There is no explanation as to why appellant has been falsely implicated in this case.

¶16

The appeal is accordingly dismissed. The order of the trial court is affirmed.

¶17

The court below is directed to conclude the trial against the appellant, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶18

Order Date :- 29.5.2023 Atul kr. sri.

¶19

3 of 3

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Santosh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh 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

Ashok Kumar Dixit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rinku Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Afsar Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kailashnath Tripathi Vs State of U.P.

Raja Beg @ Rashid Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another