Parvesh @ Parvej Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:34587

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1359 of 2021

Appellant :- Parvesh @ Parvej Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- Ashutosh Mishra,Kamlesh Singh,Rahul Agnihotri,Som Nath Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rajesh Trivedi

¶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 22.07.2021 passed by Additional Special Judge, SC/ST Act, District- Lucknow in Bail Application No.4756/2021, arising out of Crime No. 86 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 304 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(dha), 3(2)5, 3(2)5A, of SC/ST Act, registered at Police Station-Malihabad, District- Lucknow, whereby rejecting the bail application of the appellant.

¶10

While assailing the impugned order, under appeal, dated 22.07.2021, 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.

¶11

He further stated that as per prosecution story on 09.03.2021 at about 9:30 PM, while the deceased was discharging his duty as Guard at 'Hari Nursery', the appellant assaulted the deceased with 'Danda' over his head and on account of these blows the deceased sustained injuries and succumb to the same.

¶12

It is further submitted that allegations levelled against the appellant are false, which can be deduced from the fact that statement of alleged eye witnesses namely Sonu Yadav, Ankit Rehdas, Dharmendra Kumar Gautam, Chandrashekhar Yadav and Ramanand Rawat, were recorded by the Investigating Officer after the huge delay of 28 days and this delay also

¶13

shows that all the witnesses are planted witnesses and as per informant also there is no eye witness.

¶14

It is further submitted that for causing injuries to the deceased, the motive has not been assigned.

¶15

He further submitted that taking note of aforesaid as also that the appellant, having no criminal history, is in jail since 11.03.2021, which has not been opposed by the A.G.A., and also that possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely bleak, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the appellant be released on bail.

¶16

Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of the counsel for the appellant.

¶17

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, including the period of incarceration i.e. about 3 years, and delay in recording the statements of alleged eye witnesses, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed.

¶18

Order dated 22.07.2021 passed by Additional Special Judge, SC/ST Act, District- Lucknow in Bail Application No.4756/2021, arising out of Crime No. 86 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 304 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(dha), 3(2)5, 3(2)5A, of SC/ST Act, registered at Police Station-Malihabad, District- Lucknow, is hereby set aside.

¶19

Let appellant- Parvesh alias Parvej 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 :-

¶20

(i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence.

¶24

(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.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

(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.

¶28

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

¶29

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.

¶30

Order Date :- 3.5.2024 Jyoti/-

¶31

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

Parvesh @ Parvej v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parvesh @ Parvej v. State of U.P. and Anr.

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

Similar cases

Salman Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Jagdish Prasad Yadav @ Jagdish Prasad and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Another

Bablu Kashyap @ Amit Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Another

Mohit Verma @ Dhirendra Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Veer Vikram Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Smt. Aneeta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Another