Hanuman Singh Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:2819

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1969 of 2022 Appellant :- Hanuman Singh Respondent :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home And Another

¶4

Counsel for Appellant :- Vineet Kumar Chaurasia,Aman Kumar Shrivastav,Sarvesh Kumar Tiwari,Sharvan Kumar Pandey,Suraj Singh Visen Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Priyanka

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present appeal has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 11.08.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gonda in Bail Application No.1702/2022 arising out of Case Crime No.376/2021 under Sections 406, 420, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha) and 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Karnailganj, District- Gonda.

¶8

It is evident from the record that counter affidavit has been filed by Ms. Priyanka and her name is also shown in the cause list as counsel for the respondent but she is not present before this Court. As the matter is pending since August, 2022, therefore, the same is being proceeded for final disposal.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that appellant was falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that two cheques were given by the private respondent and those were dishonoured, thereafter, notice was issued to him and in retaliation, F.I.R. of case in question was lodged. He further submitted that the alleged offences are punishable upto seven years. He further submitted that protection was granted to the appellant by the writ court and during the course of investigation, appellant was not taken into custody. He further submitted that the trial court failed to consider the prosecution story as well as defense of appellant, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of appellant but he does not dispute this fact that alleged offence is punishable upto seven years and during the course of investigation, appellant was not taken into custody.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of appeal as well as other relevant documents; it is evident that alleged offence is punishable upto seven years and during the course of investigation, appellant was not taken into custody. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that learned trial court failed to consider the aforesaid aspects, hence, the aforesaid impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Resultantly, in the above facts and circumstances of the case, the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, hence, the present appeal has substance, and it is accordingly allowed , and the impugned order dated 11.08.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gonda is hereby set aside.

¶13

Let the appellant- Hanuman Singh involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶14

(1) 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.

¶15

(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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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 sufficient 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.

¶18

Order Date :- 10.1.2024/V. Sinha

¶19

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

Hanuman Singh v. the State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanuman Singh v. the State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

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

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

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

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

Rashid @ Khunai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko and 2 Others

Munnulal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Pawan Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 4 Others