Allowed

Nisar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Allahabad HC29 Jan 2024/1919/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an appeal against the rejection of a bail application under the SC/ST Act. The court quashed the lower court's order and granted bail to the appellant, noting the trial is not concluded and offences are punishable up to seven years.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order was set aside and the appellant was released on bail furnishing personal bond and two sureties.

Nisar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:8200

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1919 of 2022

¶4

Appellant :- Nisar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Gulam Mustafa,Anuj Pratap Singh,Rakesh Kumar

¶5

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Neelu Singh Chauhan,Peeyush Pankaj

¶6

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2.

¶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 28.06.2022 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Bail Application No. 4734 of 2022 arising out of F.I.R. No. 546 of 2021, under Section 308 I.P.C., Section 3(2)(v) A of SC/ST Act, P.S. Para, District Lucknow.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the appellant has been implicated in six cases, three of which have been lodged by the family members of the victim of the present case. It is also submitted that the alleged offences are punishable upto 7 years. It is also submitted that the charge sheet has been filed and there is no possibility of tampering of any evidence. It is lastly submitted that the court below has not considered all these facts while rejecting the bail application and the trial is also not going on. It is, thus, submitted that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appellant, who is in jail since 06.05.2022, is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the appellant is ready to cooperate in the trial.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant oppose the prayer of the appellant, but they

¶11

do not dispute that the alleged offences are punishable upto 7 years.

¶12

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the complainant and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that the alleged offences are punishable upto 7 years.

¶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.

¶14

Impugned order dated 28.06.2022 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Bail Application No. 4734 of 2022 arising out of F.I.R. No. 546 of 2021, under Section 308 I.P.C., Section 3(2)(v) A of SC/ST Act, P.S. Para, District Lucknow is hereby set aside.

¶15

Let appellant, Nisar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A 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

¶19

under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the appellant 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.

¶20

(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 appellant 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.

¶21

Order Date :- 29.1.2024 VKS

¶22

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Nisar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nisar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home 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

Bhanu Pratap Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lucknow and Anr.

Dinesh Kumar Maurya @ Dinesh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sushil Kumar Sanwal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Vinay Mitra Dwivedi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Edu. Lko. and 5 Others

Smt. Jamuna Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Ranjeet Kumar Chauhan (Loniya) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another