Dismissed

Dilip @ Tarjan Rajbhar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2023CRLA/7547/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal appeal against a bail refusal. The court held that the Special Judge correctly appreciated evidence and denied bail due to the appellant's active role in crimes involving rape, attempted murder, murder, and aggravated offenses under the SC/ST Act, finding no merit in the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Criminal appeal dismissed; trial court directed to conclude trial within four months.

Dilip @ Tarjan Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. and… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:139556

¶2

Court No. - 85

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7547 of 2019

¶4

Appellant :- Dilip @ Tarjan Rajbhar Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Manoj Kumar Maurya,Rajesh Kumar Dubey

¶5

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶7

Despite service of notice served sufficiently, none appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2.

¶8

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

¶9

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 impugned judgment and order dated 15.10.2019 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Deoria in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1116 of 2019 (Dilip @ Tarjan Rajbhar Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 51 of 2019, under Sections 376, 511, 326, 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5A and 3(2) (5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Bhatni, District Deoria.

¶10

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is submitted that the court concerned while deciding the bail application of the appellant, has not considered the material available on record. The appellant has no criminal history to his credit. Initially the first information report was lodged under Sections 376, 511, 326 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act and after investigation charge sheet has been submitted in added Sections 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act. 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 in jail since 16.04.2019 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.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application and has submitted that 8 prosecution witnesses have been recorded and

¶12

the trial is about to conclude.

¶13

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the active participation of the appellant 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, preferably, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order 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 :- 13.7.2023 Atul

¶18

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

Dilip @ Tarjan Rajbhar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip @ Tarjan Rajbhar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Israr Shekh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raju Bind Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dhruvchandra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bantu Vs State of Up Thro Principal Secretary Home Gov of Up

Dharmendra Vs State of U.P. and Another