Dismissed

Amit v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Jun 2023CRLA/252/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed the special leave petition challenging the Additional Sessions' rejection of bail. The appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST (P.A.) Act against the grant of bail was allowed by dismissing the appeal and affirming the lower court's order. The court directed the trial court to conclude the trial within a year.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; bail application rejected; trial to be concluded within one year.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:124794

¶2

RESERVED ON- 22.5.2023

¶3

DELIVERED ON - 06.06.2023

¶4

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 252 of 2023

¶5

Appellant :- Amit Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Yogesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Amar Jeet Upadhyay

¶6

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the parties

¶8

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant, Amit to set aside the impugned order dated 12.12.2022, whereby the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST(P.A.) Act, Meerut has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 156 of 2022 under Sections 302,323,504,506 IPC and Section 3(2)5 SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Partapur, District Meerut.

¶9

Allegations in the First Information Report are that the informant belongs to schedule caste.Today i.e., 27.4.2022 at about 4.30.P.M. her son Bittu was called by appellant,Amit, to his house. He took him to the second floor of his house where he beated her son Bittu and pushed him down from the roof. After fall from roof he suffered injuries on legs and heads. Thereafter the appellant abused him by caste related words and after

¶10

threatening him he ran away.The incident was seen by the number of persons coming to the park.

¶11

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that it is a case of false implication. Appellant had given Rs.110,000/- as debt to the son of the first informant but he has not returning the same and thereafter some dispute took place between the families of both the parties and therefore appellant was falsely implicated in this case. He has further submitted that it is a case of false implication. There was no motive for the appellant of committing the murder of the deceased.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 have vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the appellant. Learned A.G.A. has placed case diary of the investigation prepared by the investigating officer before the court. The statements of the father and mother of the deceased and the witnesses, have fully supported the prosecution case.The independent witnesses have also supported the allegations made against the appellant in the First Information Report. The police constable, Hemant Sharma who took the deceased in the injured condition to the C.H.C., in unconscious state has proved the incident. In P.V.R., whereon constable Hirdesh , was on duty in his statement has proved the incident.The witness who called number 112 has also given statement his in accordance with prosecution case.The deceased died on account of injuries sustained and hence implication under section 302 I.P.C. was made.The injuries found on the body of the injured show that on the left thigh and

¶13

2 of 4

¶14

left hip joint of the deceased there were serious injuries apart from the injuries on his hand and leg. Doctor who conducted postmortem of dead body of deceased deposed that cause of death of the deceased was due to chronic illness of multiple organs involvement. The motive of crime is alleged to be Rs.50,000/- given by the deceased son of informant to the appellant, which he was not returning to the deceased and called him to his house and pushed him from the roof top to get rid of him.

¶15

The following injuries have been found by the doctor :-

¶16

Ante Mortem Injuries:-

¶17

1.Dorsum of Rt hand partialy healed wound 10 cmx 5cm.,Thumb 7 index finger tip blackened and hardened with atrophied muscles,

¶18

2.A stitched wound with 6 staple stitches in 4cm in length on outer aspect of Lt. Thigh,

¶19

8cmx 1.5 cm incised wound on outer aspect of Lt. Thigh. A plastic drain sheet is placed through it, bone deep.

¶20

4.On outer aspect of Lt. Hip joint, 5cmx2cm incised wound with a plastic drain sheet is placed through it, cavity deep;

¶21

5.Outer aspect of Lt. elbow healed 5cmx 5 cm scar mark;

¶22

6.Inner aspect of Rt forearm healed scar marks in 23 cmx 7 cm.

¶23

It appears that on account of incised wound of outer aspect of left thigh and another incised wound on left hip

¶24

3 of 4

¶25

joint, the deceased died.In the left thigh of the of the deceased plastic drain sheet was placed through it, bone deep, while in left hip joint plastic drain sheet was placed which was cavity deep.These injuries could have proved fatal for life of the deceased.They can be caused by falling from height. A hip fracture has potential threat to life and can cause death.

¶26

This Court after hearing the learned counsels for the parties does not finds any ground for enlarging the appellant on bail.

¶27

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

¶28

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.

¶29

Order Date :- 06.06.2023 Atul kr. sri.

¶30

4 of 4

¶31

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

Amit v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit 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

Lalit Mohan Srivastava @ Pawan Srivastava and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Halku Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Fakruddin @ Fakaru Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arun Kumar Alias Gaurav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Irfan Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Navase Vs State of U.P. and Another