Dismissed

Vineet Alias Golu v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 May 2023CRLA/893/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal, the appellant challenged the rejection of his bail application. The Court rejected the bail prayer due to criminal antecedents and recovery of evidence on his pointing, dismissing the appeal and affirming the lower court order.

What did the court decide?

The criminal appeal is dismissed; the trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously within a year.

Vineet Alias Golu Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:110278 Reserved On:-15.05.2023 Delivered On:-19.05.2023

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 893 of 2022

¶4

Appellant :- Vineet Alias Golu Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Pavan Kishore,Gaurav Singh Tomar,Inder Pal Singh Tomar,Shreesh Bahadur Tripathi,Vishal Sunder Saurabh Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Girijesh Kumar Gupta,Shiv Shankar Pd Gupta

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard Sri I.P.S. Tomar, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Girijesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶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 12.01.2022 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act,Ghaziabad, in Bail Application No. 9204/2021, has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 518/2021, under Sections 302, 394, 411, 34 IPC and Section 3(2) (V) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Bhojpur,, District Ghaziabad.

¶8

There is allegation in the FIR that on 02.09.2021 at about 5:30 to 5:45 pm, brother of the informant, Naresh, aged about 38 years was murdered by causing fire arm injuries by named accused, Bholu @ Nitin Rawat, Ankush, son of Dharmendra, and one unknown accused and he died on spot.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant was not named in the FIR. He was also not named in the initial statement of the informant recorded by the Investigating Officer on 04.09.2021. His name surfaced in the application made by the informant before S.S.P., Ghaziabad, after seven days of the lodging of the FIR; from the second statement of the informant recorded by the Investigating Officer on 09.09.2021 and the statements of the wife of the deceased and mother of the deceased which are based on hearsay evidence. No statement of alleged eye witness, Kuldeep Tomar, who was witness of the incident with

¶10

¶11

the informant, as per second statement of the informant, has been recorded by the Investigating Officer nor he has been shown as witness in the chargesheet. The appellant has no criminal antecedents and has been falsely implicated in this case. He is languishing in jail since 11.09.2021.

¶12

Learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for the bail of the appellant and have stated that during investigation, the appellant and co-accused were arrested and on their pointing out the weapon used in alleged crime, motorcycle of the deceased, his mobile phone and money were recovered and the appellant has confessed about the commission of alleged crime made by him before the Investigating Officer. After present implication the family members of accused have committed further offences against the informant and her family members.

¶13

After hearing the rival submissions and the facts that recovery of arms and goods belonging to the deceased have been made on the pointing out of the appellant and other co-accused; the appellant has criminal history of three cases detailed in the counter-affidavit filed by learned AGA which has not been disclosed in the bail application of the appellant, trial court does not finds it is a fit case for grant of bail to the appellant.

¶14

7. The criminal appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. The order of the court below is affirmed.

¶15

The trial court is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant as expeditiously as possible, preferable within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶16

Order Date:19.05.2023.

¶17

Abhishek

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vineet Alias Golu v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vineet Alias Golu 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

Khardookshan @ Bhayyan @ Tiger Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Monti Raikwar @ Manohar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Bhola Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravindra Kumar Bind Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Ram Dhakeli Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vishal Vs State of U.P. and Another