Allowed

Ravi Shukla @ Dharmendra Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and 2 Others

Allahabad HC19 Feb 2024/300/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an appeal against a bail rejection order dated 01.01.2024. The court set aside the lower order as it failed to consider the absence of the appellant's motorcycle in the case diary, a material fact. Bail was granted on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 01.01.2024 set aside; appellant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions.

Ravi Shukla @ Dharmendra Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:14486

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 300 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Ravi Shukla @ Dharmendra Shukla Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ashish Kumar Singh,Manish Srivastava

¶5

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶7

In pursuance of the earlier order, a written notice duly signed by Shri Virendra Kumar Shukla, Sub Inspector, Police StationDhanepur, District-Gonda is placed before this Court. The same is taken on record.

¶8

From the perusal of the said notice, it transpires that information has already been given to the private respondent but no one is present on her behalf. Therefore, the matter is decided with the assistance of the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A.

¶9

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

¶10

The present appeal has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 01.01.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gonda in Second Bail Application No.3157 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No.0343 of 2023, under sections 341/307/354/354(D)/452/323/504/506 of I.P.C. and section 3(1) (r)/3(1)(s)/3(1)(w)/3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police StationDhanepur, District-Gonda.

¶11

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has falsely been implicated in this case. He has further submitted that the F.I.R. of the case in question was lodged on 03.11.2023 on the written complaint of the victim. Learned counsel for the appellant also submits that the agriculture field of the appellant as well as the father of the victim are adjoining to each other and the irrigation facility in the agriculture field of the victim was being taken from the appellant and huge dues thereof were pending and the father of the victim has also borrowed heavy money to purchase the seeds and fertilizer and the father of the victim was unable to clear all the dues pending again him, therefore, the irrigation facility was not being

¶12

allowed to him as result of which he was annoyed with the intention to make pressure on the basis of incorrect fact to register F.I.R. He further submitted that as per the prosecution case, the appellant came to the house of the victim and on her alarm, he ran away by leaving his motorcycle and thereafter incident was reported to the police control room and police team reached on the sport but no motorcycle of the appellant was found and no recovery of motorcycle has been shown either in the case diary or in any other document prepared by the police team, who reached on the spot. Charge-sheet has already been filed and the appellant is in jail since 04.11.2023 and he does not have any criminal antecedent. All these facts have not been considered by the learned court below. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant and has submitted that the victim has supported the prosecution version, but he does not dispute the fact that no any motorcycle was found on sport and no recovery memo has been prepared by the investigating officer.

¶14

Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, the F.I.R., statements of the victim recorded under section 161 of Cr.P.C. & 164 of Cr.P.C. as well as other documents, it is evident that as per the prosecution case, appellant came to the house of the victim with his motorcycle and on being raised the alarm by the victim, the appellant went away by leaving his motorcycle at her house but his motorcycle was not found in the entire case diary. All these facts were not considered by the learned court below while rejecting the bail application. Thus, this Court is of the view that the impugned order is liable to be set side and the appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

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 01.01.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gonda is hereby set aside.

¶16

Let the appellant- Ravi Shukla @ Dharmendra Shukla involved in the aforementioned crime number 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:-

¶17

(i) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he

¶18

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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(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.

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 19.2.2024 akhilesh/

¶24

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

Ravi Shukla @ Dharmendra Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Shukla @ Dharmendra Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and 2 Others

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

Yoonus Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Mahanth Shashikant Das @ Golu Das Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Ministry Home Affairs Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko.

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

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

Sant Prasad and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Rashid Ali and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and Another