Allowed

Bachai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Another

Allahabad HC30 Jan 2024/228/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Appeal filed to set aside bail rejection. Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and released the appellant on bail with specific conditions, noting the co-accused with an identical role had already been released.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside and appellant released on bond and two sureties with specific conditions.

Bachai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:8568

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 228 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Bachai Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Devendra Upadhyay,Sanjay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present appeal has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 04.01.2024 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Pratapgarh in Bail Application No. 3045 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 45 of 2022 U/s 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 307/34 I.P.C., Section 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Sangramgarh, District- Pratapgarh; for releasing appellant on bail in the aforesaid case crime.

¶8

Written instructions dated 29.01.2024 placed by learned A.G.A. duly signed by Station House Officer, Police StationKunda, District- Pratapgarh are taken on record. From the said instructions, it is informed that notice is already served to complainant of the present case, but none appears on his behalf.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was falsely implicated in the present case and co-accused person, namely, Om Prakash, having identical role, has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 06.11.2023 passed in Crl. Appeal No. 1273 of 2023 (the order is annexed at page nos. 105 and 106). He further submits that charge-sheet has already been submitted by Investigating Officer. He further submits that appellant is in jail since 16.10.2023, he does not have any criminal antecedent, he is ready to cooperate in the trial and there is no possibility of tempering of any evidence, hence, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of appellant, but he does not dispute the fact that co-accused person, namely, Om Prakash, having identical role, has already been enlarged on bail.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of appeal, impugned order, injury reports, bail order of co-accused person, namely, Om Prakash as well as other relevant

¶12

documents; this Court is of the view that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶13

Resultantly, in view of the above facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, hence, the appeal has substance and it is accordingly allowed and the impugned order dated 04.01.2024 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Pratapgarh is hereby set aside.

¶14

Let the appellant- Bachai 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:-

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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 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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

Office is directed to communicate this order to the trial court, forthwith.

¶20

Order Date :- 30.1.2024 Arpan

¶21

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

Bachai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bachai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

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

Sunil Singh Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Shiv Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Jhabbar and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another