Allowed

Raj Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Oct 2024/490/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal appeal under the SC/ST Act against rejection of bail; court found injuries non-fatal, injured witness's statement not recorded, and long incarceration, allowed appeal and released appellant on bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appellant to be released on bail on personal bond Rs. 25,000/- plus two sureties of like amount, subject to stated conditions.

Raj Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:70367

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 490 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Raj Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Om Prakash Nag Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

1. Case called out.

¶7

Considering the Annexure No. 1 of Counter Affidavit filed by the State with a proof of service of notice upon respondent no. 2, this Court finds that service of notice upon the respondent no. 2 is sufficient. However, no one appeared on behalf of the respondent no. 2 to oppose the present appeal. In that view of the matter, this Court proceeds hear the instant appeal.

¶8

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

¶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 16.12.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ayodhya/Faizabad in Bail Application No. 45 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 0005 of 2023, under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506, 436 I.P.C., Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act and Sections 4/25 Arms Act, P.S. Kumarganj, District Ayodhya/Faizabad.

¶10

Pressing the present appeal and impeaching the order, under appeal, dated 16.12.2023, it is stated that the appellant, having criminal history of four cases and the same has been explained in para 15 of the rejoinder affidavit, is in jail since 24.01.2023 in relation to the Case Crime No. 0005 of 2023, under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506, 436 I.P.C., Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act and Sections 4/25 Arms Act, P.S. Kumarganj, District Ayodhya/Faizabad.

¶11

It is further stated that according to the case of the prosecution indicated in the FIR No. 0005 dated 17.01.2023, the appellant assailed the injured on 17.01.2023 with sword and on account of the assault of the appellant the injured sustained five injuries.

¶12

It is further stated that according to the injuries indicated in the medico-legal report including the injury nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5, which were

¶13

kept in observation, it is evident that the same were not fatal in nature and as such if the case of the prosecution is taken on its face value even in that eventuality offense under Section 307 IPC would not be attracted.

¶14

It is further stated that the Investigating Officer (in short "I.O."), during the course of the investigation, did not record the statementt of the inured which is also evident from the charge-sheet particularly column 13 wherein particulars of witnesses to be examined has been indicate though the same was required.

¶15

It is further stated that the injured sustained injuries somewhere else and on account of the dispute of thatch situated in the vicinity, which caught fire for the reason best known to the informant and her other family members, in relation to which the allegations have been levelled against the appellant in the FIR, the appellant has been implicated.

¶16

It is further stated that alleged recovery, from open place, of the sword is completely fake.

¶17

It is further stated that taking note of the aforesaid fact including that the statement of the inured witness has not been reduced in writing by the I.O. as also that the appellant is in jail since 24.01.2023 and from the injuries sustained offense under Section 307 IPC would not be attracted, indulgence of this Court is required in the matter. As such, appellant is entitled for bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

¶18

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel.

¶19

Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R. and medical report.

¶20

Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances particularly the statement of the inured witness has not been reduced in writing by the I.O., and the nature of injuries sustained by the injured as also the period of incarceration also keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed .

¶21

Order dated 16.12.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ayodhya/Faizabad in Bail Application No. 45 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 0005 of 2023, under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506, 436 I.P.C., Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act and Sections 4/25 Arms

¶22

Act, P.S. Kumarganj, District Ayodhya/Faizabad is set aside.

¶23

Let appellant Raj Kumar Singh , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :-

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

(iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es).

¶27

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence.

¶28

(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.

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

(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.

¶32

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

¶33

As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations 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 made in this order.

¶34

Order Date :- 18.10.2024 Mohit Singh/-

¶35

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

Raj Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. 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

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

Dheeraj Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Anjani Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Shyam Lali Vs State of U.P.

Vikram Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

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