Allowed

Rakesh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Feb 2023CRLA/9866/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal appeal filed against a bail rejection order. The court held that the appellant and identically circumstanced co-accused should be enlarged on bail given the nature of injuries, though observations do not touch merits.

What did the court decide?

The bail appeal was allowed; the impugned bail rejection order was set aside; the appellant was ordered to be released on personal bond and two sureties.

Rakesh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 93

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9866 of 2022

¶3

Appellant :- Rakesh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sunil Kumar Singh,Pawan Kumar Patel Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Santosh Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.

¶5

List revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Laxman Prasad, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Notice has been personally served on respondent no. 2, Abhishek, but no one has appeared on his behalf.

¶8

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 03.12.2022 passed by Special Judge, S.C./S/.T. Act, Firozabad, whereby the learned Judge has rejected the Bail Application No. 4481 of 2022 (Rakesh and another Vs. State of U.P.) moved on behalf of the appellant in Case Crime No. 486 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 452, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Sections 3(2)(V) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Jasrana, DistrictFirozabad.

¶9

It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that :-

¶10

(i) the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to enmity;

¶11

(ii) general role has been assigned to the appellant along with 8- 9 named accused persons;

¶12

(iii) all the injured persons, namely, Abhishek Kumar, Km. Bandana, Pankaj and Umendra Singh have received only simple injuries. None of the injured have received firearm injuries;

¶13

(iv) identically circumstanced co-accused persons, namely, Navlesh, Bhuvan alias Bhuvnesh, Amlesh and Awadhesh, have already been enlarged on bail by the trial court vide orders dated 01.10.2022 and 20.10.2022 respectively; and

¶14

(v) the appellant is in jail since 14.11.2022. The appellant has explained the criminal history of one case in paragraph no. 3 of the supplementary affidavit filed in the criminal appeal. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶15

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant but he could not dispute the aforesaid factum of the case as argued by the learned counsel for the appellant.

¶16

Considering the submissions made on behalf of both the learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A., facts and circumstances of the case, injury report of the injured persons and the fact that identically circumstanced co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail by the trial court, 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.

¶17

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

¶18

Let the appellant, Rakesh , 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:-

¶19

(i) That the appellant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless his presence is exempted by the court.

¶20

(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.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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.

¶24

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

¶25

and 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.

¶26

Order Date :- 1.2.2023 KS

¶27

Digitally signed by :- KISHAN SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rakesh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh 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

Bablu Kumar Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sani @ Hani @ Himanshu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bablu Kumar Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Swapnil Tomar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Nazma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raffan Vs State of U.P. and Another