Alkesh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:193472

Court No. - 85

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6424 of 2023

Appellant :- Alkesh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Satendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rakesh Kumar Rathore

¶5

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for opposite party no.1 and learned counsel for the informant and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant to set aside the impugned order dated 16.05.2023 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Mainpuri has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 171 of 2023, under Sections 307, 323, 504, 506 of IPC, and Section 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kurawali, District Mainpur.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that in the FIR only general role has been assigned to all the named persons. No specific role has been assigned to appellant. Injured Gurubachan Singh during his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. assigned specific role of firing behind of his back with the firearm to the present appellant. It is submitted that a country made pistol on the pointing of the applicant is recovered which is planted and there is no independent witness of such recovery. So far as the medical report of the injured is concerned, no seat of injury is mentioned. It is submitted that in the medical report nature of injury was not mentioned as to whether the injury was fatal or not. It is also submitted that the injured discharged from the hospital on 14.03.2023 in stable condition. It is also submitted that named accused Abhishek has been exonerated during the investigation by the Investigating Officer. It is a case of malicious prosecution under the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act. Applicant is languishing in jail since 08.03.2023 having no criminal history. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and argued that the injured had stated about the specific role of the accused and the role of firing has been assigned to the appellant. A country made pistol has also been recovered on the possession of the appellant at the time of his arrest.

¶10

It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the trial court has not properly considered the case of the appellant. Hence, in view of above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the trial court dated 16.05.2023 is, hereby, set aside.

¶11

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant; appellant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, Court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Let appellant, Alkesh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶13

(i) 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.

¶14

(ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶15

(iii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.

¶16

(iv) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.

¶17

(v) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶18

(vi) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed in accordance with law.

¶20

The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the appellant, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶21

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶22

The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶23

Order Date :- 9.10.2023 Mohit

¶24

Digitally signed by :- MOHIT KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Alkesh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alkesh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bharat Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shekhar Alias Chandra Shekhar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikas Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sonu Pal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raja and Another Vs State of U.P.