Allowed

Monu @ Ghanghru v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2023CRLA/8790/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Special Criminal Court allowed the bail appeal against the rejection of bail application under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, directing the release of the appellant on personal bond and sureties with standard conditions and a disclaimer regarding merits.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of attending trial, not tampering with evidence, and not engaging in criminal activity.

Monu @ Ghanghru Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 93

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8790 of 2022

¶3

Appellant :- Monu @ Ghanghru Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sunil Kumar Srivastava,Padmaker Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ram Prasad Kanaujiya

¶4

Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the appellant has filed bail orders relating to co-accused Gaurav Jain and Vishal Rajput passed by another coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.12.2022 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 2416 of 2022 and 973 of 2022. These are taken on record.

¶7

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed against the order dated 14.09.2022 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Kanpur Nagar whereby the learned Judge has rejected the appellant's Bail Application No. 3134 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 920 of 2021, under Sections 147, 307, 323, 504, 506, 34 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5Ka, 3(2)5, 3(1)Da, 3(1)Dha of SC/ST Act, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar.

¶8

Brief facts of the case are that the first information report dated 23.09.2021 was lodged by sister of the injured against the appellant and three other named and unknown person stating that on 22.09.2021 at about 10:30 p.m. the appellant and other coaccused persons assaulted her brother by chopper, bricks and abused her brother with caste derogatory words.

¶9

After lodging the FIR, medical examination of the injured, Dheeraj

¶10

Kumar was conducted on 23.09.2021. As per medical report three lacerated would were found on the person of the injured on skull and as per C.T. Scan report depressed fracture was seen in right parietal region. Soft tissue scalp and facial injuries are present. After recording the statements of the other prosecution witnesses, charge sheet had been submitted against the appellant and three named persons on 16.01.2022.

¶11

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is submitted that no specific role of assault has been attributed to the appellant. A general role of assault has been attributed to the appellant and other co-accused persons. It is submitted that the medical examination report does not mention any firearm injury. The role of assaulting by firearm (Katta) has been attributed to co-accused Vishal. It is fairly averred that the appellant is a respectable citizen having no criminal history.

¶12

It is also submitted that similarly circumstanced co-accused Gaurav Jain and Vishal Rajput have already been enlarged on bail by another co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.12.2022 passed in in Criminal Appeal Nos. 2416 of 2022 and 973 of 2022, entitling the appellant to be released on bail on the ground of parity. It is in the last submitted that the appellant is in jail since 30.04.2022 and in case he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant, but could not dispute the aforesaid factum of the case as argued by the learned counsel for the appellant. Considering the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties, facts

¶14

and circumstances of the case, nature of the offence, evidence appearing in the case, the fact that no specific role of assault has been assigned to the appellant, the fact that co-accused Gaurav Jain and Vishal Rajput have already been enlarged on bail, the detention period of the appellant, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail.

¶15

Accordingly, the appeal is hereby allowed . The impugned order dated 14.09.2022 rejecting the bail application of the appellant is hereby set aside.

¶16

Let the appellant Monu @ Ghanghru be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶17

(i) That the appellant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.

¶18

(ii) That 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.

¶19

(iii) That after his release, the appellant shall not involve in any criminal activity.

¶20

(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the appellant on bail.

¶21

It is made clear that in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the appellant.

¶22

It is also made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and

¶23

will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court/J.J.Board shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusion on the basis of evidence led, uninfluenced by any finding or observation whatsoever in this order.

¶24

Order Date :- 10.2.2023 Brijesh Maurya

¶25

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

Monu @ Ghanghru v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monu @ Ghanghru 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

Tapan Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhishek Nishad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohanlal @ Ram Chandra @ Om Prakash Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

M/S Sunil Plastic Industries Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shikha Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Himanshu Alias Govind Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another