Allowed

Shatruhan Prasad Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Feb 2024/1199/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal appeal against an order rejecting bail under the SC/ST Act. It set aside the bail rejection and ordered the release of the appellant on personal and surety bonds, with instructions to the trial court to complete the trial immediately.

What did the court decide?

Impugned bail rejection order set aside; appellant released on personal and surety bonds under specific conditions.

Shatruhan Prasad Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:10988

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1199 of 2023 Appellant :- Shatruhan Prasad Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sushil Kumar Misra,Ajay Madhavan,Mata Prasad Yadav

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Arvind Kumar Pandey

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Vakalatnama filed by Sri Dinesh Kumar Singh, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.5 is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant.

¶8

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 01.04.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Balrampur in Bail Application No. 59 of 2023 arising out of F.I.R. No. 0145 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 352, 452, 307, 34 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Balrampur.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is aged about 72 years and as per the prosecution case, the role of the appellant is of exhortation. He further submits that complainant side was the aggressor and as the appellant was beaten, thereafter, due to sudden provocation, said incident was taken place. He further submits that appellant is also reported that he received lacerated wound on his head in the said incident but he was not sent for medico legal examination by the police and thereafter, he obtained first aid where he medically examined. He also submits that F.I.R. of the applicant was also lodged, and this is a cross case as three persons from the side of the complainant received simple injuries and one was on the parietal bone. He further submits that it was obligatory on the part of the Investigating OfÏcer to ensure the investigation of both the cases by common Investigating OfÏcer

¶10

but charge sheet has already been filed in the present case and investigation of the case of appellant is pending. He also submits that alleged offences are punishable less then seven years but all these facts were not considered by the court below and rejected the bail application, therefore, appellant, who is in jail since 21.03.2023, is entitled for bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently oppose the prayer of the appellant and submit that on the exhortation of appellant, incident was taken place and F.I.R. from the side of appellant was lodged after seven days and he was medically examined in the private hospital on the next date but they do not dispute the fact that all the alleged offences are punishable less than seven years.

¶12

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the complainant and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., medico legal examination of the injured person as well as F.I.R. lodged from the side of the appellant, it is evident that role of the appellant was of exhortation and he also received injuries in the incident. Apparently, all these facts were not considered by the court below at the time of rejecting the bail application vide impugned order dated 01.04.2023.

¶13

In view of above facts and circumstances as also keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed and order dated 01.04.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Balrampur in Bail Application No. 59 of 2023 arising out of F.I.R. No. 0145 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 352, 452, 307, 34 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Balrampur, is hereby set aside.

¶14

Let appellant Shatruhan Prasad Yadav , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime

¶15

number on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :-

¶16

(i) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶17

(ii) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(iii) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(iv) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

Trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, as soon as possible, from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶21

District and Sessions Judge, Balrampur is directed to ensure the compliance of direction of this Court in relation to the conclusion of trial of the case in question.

¶22

Order Date :- 6.2.2024 Gaurav/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shatruhan Prasad Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shatruhan Prasad Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. 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

Radhey Shyam Kannaujiya vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and 2 Others

Akhilesh Kumar Maurya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Krishna Kumar Yadav @ Pankaj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sumit Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sarvesh Kumar Vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Ibrar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another