Allowed

Arun Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2023CRLA/5631/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed the bail rejection order and granted bail to the appellant, a matrimonial rape and SC/ST atrocity accused, upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions preventing evidence tampering and intimidation.

What did the court decide?

Release of appellant on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5631 of 2023

¶3

Appellant :- Arun Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Chandra Prakash Pandey,Phool Chandra Saroj

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Abhishek Trivedi

¶5

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the appellant which is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

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 08.05.2023 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Court No.2, Shahjahanpur in Bail Application No. 1209 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 86 of 2023, under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3 (2) 5 of SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Tilhar, District Shahjahanpur.

¶9

As per the prosecution version on 30.10.2022 at around 4.00 pm, appellant established physical relation with the prosecutrix on the pretext of marriage and also took Rs. 5 lakh through account as well as in cash from the informant. Later on he refused to perform marriage with her. When prosecutrix went to the house of appellant to make complaint, she was abused by her caste related words and threatened by the appellant as well as his family members.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that earlier an F.I.R. having Case Crime No. 14 of 2022, under Sections 376, 406, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3 (1) Da, 3 (1) Dha and 3 (2) (V) of SC/ST Act, PS Tilhar, District Shahjahanpur was lodged by the prosecutrix against appellant and others in which after investigation, a final report was submitted by the Investigating Officer. Again on the the same

¶11

allegations, the present F.I.R. has been lodged. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that there is no chance of the appellant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The appellant is languishing in jail since 16.03.2023 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.

¶12

Pursuant to order dated 08.08.2023, appellant was on interim bail till 19.09.2023 and was directed to pay Rs. 1.5 lacs to the prosecutrix through demand draft before the trial court and trial court shall submit a report regarding the same before this Court.

¶13

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that a demand draft of Rs.1.50 lakh is produced before the trial court and certified copy of the application along-with demand draft is presented before this Court. Further, learned counsel for the appellant prays for grant of bail to the appellant.

¶14

Learned counsel for the informant admitted that demand draft of Rs. 1.50 lakh has been received.

¶15

Per contra, learned counsel for the informant could not dispute the aforesaid factual aspects of the matter.

¶16

10.Considering the argument advanced on behalf of learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the informant, this court deems it appropriate to release the appellant on bail.

¶17

11.Let the appellant, namely, Arun Kumar involved in the above Case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

(iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶21

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶22

(v) 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.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶24

Order Date :- 19.9.2023 PS

¶25

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

Arun Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Kumar 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

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

Tareeq Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aashish Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others