Allowed

Ashish v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Apr 2024/494/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail appeal filed under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act. The Court held that the impugned order rejecting bail erred in not considering confessional statements incriminating the appellant. Since co-accused were granted bail by a coordinate bench, the appeal was allowed and the appellant released on bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 02.08.2023 rejected; appellant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties under specified conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:26764

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 494 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Ashish Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Abhay Kumar Srivastva Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by counsel for the appellant is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶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 02.08.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow, in Bail Application No. 6217 of 2023, arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No.128 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504 & 307 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (da), 3(1) (dha) and Section 3(2) 5-A of SC/ST Act, registered at Police Station- Rahimabad, District- Lucknow.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the Investigating Officer filed the charge sheet in mechanical manner as the FIR was lodged against 8 persons levelling general allegation against all. It is further submitted that the trial court also failed to appreciate the evidence in correct perspective and passed the order impugned. He also submits that trial is not going on and there is possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is bleak. The appellant is languishing in jail since 22.07.2023 and he does not have any criminal history and is entitled for bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that coaccused, namely, Sachin Yadav @ Tanna, Sonu @ Ravindra

¶11

and Naresh have been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal No.2917 of 2023 vide order dated 22.03.2024; Criminal Appeal No.3168 of 2023 vide order dated 07.02.2024 & Criminal Appeal No.3625 of 2023 vide order dated07.02.2024, respectively, therefore, the appellant is also entitled for bail.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the case.

¶13

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that in the confessional statement of co-accused, name of the appellant was surfaced in the case in question but all these facts were not considered by the trial court at the time of rejecting the bail application vide impugned order dated 02.08.2023.

¶14

In view of above facts and circumstances as also keeping in view the fact that co-accused Sachin Yadav @ Tanna, Sonu @ Ravindra and Naresh have been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal No.2917 of 2023 vide order dated 22.03.2024; Criminal Appeal No.3168 of 2023 vide order dated 07.02.2024 & Criminal Appeal No.3625 of 2023 vide order dated 07.02.2024, respectively, the appeal has substance and it is, accordingly, allowed.

¶15

Accordingly, order dated 02.08.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Bail Application No. 6217 of 2023 arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 128 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 307 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (da), dha and 3(2) 5-A of SC/ST Act, Police StationRahimabad, District- Lucknow.

¶16

Let appellant Ashish, 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 the following conditions :-

¶17

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

¶18

(ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during

¶19

trial.

¶20

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

¶21

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence.

¶22

(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.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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 order(s) in accordance with law.

¶26

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.

¶27

Order Date :- 1.4.2024 (Manoj K.)

¶28

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

Ashish v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bhagauti Prasad Vs the Court of Board of Revenue U.P. Lko. and 5 Others

Shalini Tripathi Vs Naib Tehsildar, Jagdishpur, Tehsil Musafirkhana, Mandal Ayodhya and Others

Smt. Bitana Vs Tehsildar Judicial Bahraich and 2 Others

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

Suresh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Rambaran @ Langdu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.