Dharmaraj Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 8 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:37100

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1356 of 2024

Appellant :- Dharmaraj Shukla Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 8 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Sukh Deo Singh,Anamika Singh,Paritosh Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Case called out. No one has appeared on behalf of private respondent, despite service of notice.

¶7

This Court proceeded to hear the appeal on merits.

¶8

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

¶9

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 23.11.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, District- Pratapgarh in Bail Application No.2129/2023, arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No.94 of 2023, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Fatanpur, District- Pratapgarh, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected.

¶10

While assailing the impugned order, under appeal, dated 23.11.2023, whereby the application seeking bail preferred by the appellant was rejected by the trial court, it is stated that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further stated that co-accused persons namely Ram Vishal Shukla, Saheb Shukla, Rahul Shukla, Ramashanker and Suraj Shukla have already been released on bail vide orders dated 15.03.2024, 01.04.2024, 10.04.2024, 22.04.2024 and 26.04.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal Nos.3483 of 2023, Criminal Appeal No. 3631 of 2023, Criminal Appeal No. 760 of 2024, Criminal Appeal No. 1057 of 2024 and Criminal Appeal No. 1193 of 2024, respectively. In these circumstances, the appellant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

¶11

He further submitted that the appellant, who is in jail since 23.05.2023, having no criminal history, which has not been opposed by the A.G.A., and also that possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely bleak, therefore, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the appellant be released on bail.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of the counsel for the appellant particularly that co-accused have already been released on bail.

¶13

Upon due consideration of the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order and other relevant documents, as also the fact that the co-accused have already been released on bail, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed.

¶14

Order dated 23.11.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, DistrictPratapgarh in Bail Application No.2129/2023, arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No.94 of 2023, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (da), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, registered at Police Station- Fatanpur, District- Pratapgarh, is hereby set aside.

¶15

Let the appellant- Dharmaraj Shukla be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) 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 cooperate with the prosecution during trial.

¶17

(ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶18

(iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s).

¶19

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence.

¶20

(v) 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

(vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel.

¶22

(vii) The appellant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court.

¶23

(viii) 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.

¶24

In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law

¶25

As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order.

¶26

Order Date :- 15.5.2024

¶27

Arun/-

¶28

Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dharmaraj Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 8 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmaraj Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 8 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shivam Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Man Singh Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Durgesh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Jagdeesh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Dhirendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

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