Dismissed

Harshit Thakur @ Aniket Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2023CRLA/4845/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the criminal appeal against the rejection of anticipatory bail. The court held that a prima facie case existed due to eyewitness corroboration and the caste-related nature of the offense, finding no merit in the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Bail rejection order upheld. Trial directed to conclude expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments.

Harshit Thakur @ Aniket Kumar and Another Vs State of… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:181474

¶2

Court No. - 85

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4845 of 2023 Appellant :- Harshit Thakur @ Aniket Kumar And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rakesh Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Garun Pal Singh,Mukesh Kumar Verma

¶4

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed today by learned A.G.A is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, 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 appellants with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 19.04.2023 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Moradabad in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1196 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 225 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 406 I.P.C., Section 3(1)Da, 3(1) Dha, 3(2)(5ka) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Chhajlet, District Moradabad.

¶8

Case of the prosecution as per the F.I.R is that the appellants alongwith other accused had taken Rs. 3 lacs from the informant to incorporate him as a partner but the informant was neither made partner nor the amount of Rs. 3 lacs was returned. When the informant made pressure on the appellants Rs. 1 lac was returned to him. Thereafter, on making demand the informant was threatened and addressed with caste related words.

¶9

Learned counsel for appellants has submitted that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that no date, time or place is mentioned in the F.I.R where the amount of Rs. 3 lacs was given to the appellants, similarly no date, time and place of incident is mentioned where and when caste related words are used and informant was threatened by the appellants. It is further submitted that it is not made clear that from which mode the amount is paid to the appellants by the informant. It is further submitted that there is no eye witness of the alleged incident. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that there is no chance of the

¶10

appellants fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The appellants having no criminal history and in case they are released on anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that informant and his father Brijpal has corroborated the version of the F.I.R. Atul Kumar @ Bittu Chaudhari and Anil Kumar are the independent witnesses before whom the informant had paid Rs. 3 lacs to the appellant. Charge-sheet has been submitted on 09.11.2022 by the Investigating Officer.

¶12

In view of the statements of the eye witnesses who has stated that before them Rs. 3 lacs were paid to the appellant and keeping in view the submission of the informant and his father that informant was addressed with caste related words, prima-facie, case is made out against the appellant. Hence, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail.

¶13

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in view of the statements of the eye witnesses who have stated that before them Rs. 3 lacs were paid to the appellants and keeping in view the submission of the informant and his father that informant was addressed with caste related words, prima-facie, case is made out against the appellants and keeping in view the active participation of the appellants in the commission of crime, I do not find it fit case for bail.

¶14

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.

¶15

Accordingly, the criminal appeal is dismissed.

¶16

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and make every endeavour to conclude the same expeditiously without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties subject to full co-operation by the appellant, if there is no legal impediment.

¶17

Order Date :- 19.9.2023/PS

¶18

Digitally signed by :- POOJA SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Harshit Thakur @ Aniket Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harshit Thakur @ Aniket Kumar and Another 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

Paramveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Guthalu @ Rajjan Lodhi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Chhabile Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tareeq Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aashish Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others