Allowed

Muzakkir v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Jul 2023CRLA/6929/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a criminal appeal against the rejection of bail under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The Court set aside the impugned order and granted bail to the appellant subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned bail rejection order set aside; appellant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specified conditions.

Muzakkir Vs State of U.P. and Another — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:148619

¶2

Court No. - 85

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6929 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Muzakkir Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sikandar B. Kochar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. states that notice on informant/opposite party no.2 is sufficient.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, 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 appellants with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 29.04.2023 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Prayagraj in Bail Application No. 395 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 1530 of 2017, Special Session Trial No. 143 of 2018, under Sections 323, 325, 308, 354-A, 452, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(Va) and 3(1)(dh) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Dhoomanganj, District Prayagraj.

¶9

As per FIR, prosecution case is that on 27.12.2017 at around 11.00 am when the husband of the informant Sant Lal was ease, the appellant and his brother (co-accused) hurled abuses and addressed caste related words. When the husband of the informant returned to his house, the appellant along with other accused entered the house, severely beaten to Sant Lal (husband of informant), the daughter of the informant Soni and Moni came forward to rescue they were also beaten by them.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. The incident happened elsewhere and was caused by some unknown persons but the appellant and other co-accused has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that as per discharge slip of the Moti Lal Nehru District Hospital, Allahabad, the husband of the informant Sant Lal was admitted on 27.12.2017 at 5.50 am while as per FIR version the incident took place on 27.12.2017 at 11.00 am. It is also submitted that the photo copy of the admission register has also been brought on record as

¶11

Annexure-5 to the affidavit which indicates that the husband of the informant Sant Lal was admitted on 26.12.2017, therefore,t he entire prosecution story is false. It is submitted that the appellant was on interim bail granted vide order dated 16.01.2023 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST), Allahabad which continued till 28.04.2023 but after submission of charge-sheet, his regular bail application has been rejected vide order dated 29.04.2023. 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 29.04.2023 having no criminal history 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

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid factual aspects of the matter.

¶13

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, this Court is of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

¶14

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.

¶15

Let appellant, Muzakkir , 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.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 25.7.2023 Prajapati

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RAMKESH PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Muzakkir v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muzakkir 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

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravindra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kallu @ Lavkush Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Tejendar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chhatrapal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akash Thakur Vs State of U.P. and Another