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

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:36849

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 996 of 2024

Appellant :- Shivam Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ajeet Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit filed today, is taken on record.

¶7

Service upon opposite party no.2 is sufficient as appears from Annexure No.1 to the counter affidavit filed by the State as also the office report dated 09.05.2024, however, when the case was called out, no one appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose the present appeal. However, learned A.G.A. is present.

¶8

In the aforesaid background of the case, this Court proceeded to hear the appeal on merits.

¶9

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

¶10

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 10.11.2023 passed by the Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act, 1989, Hardoi, in Bail Application No. 3305 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 265 of 2023 under Sections 363/366 I.P.C. and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Lonar, District-Hardoi.

¶11

While assailing the impugned order, under appeal, dated 10.11.2023, whereby the application seeking bail preferred by the appellant was rejected by the trial court, it is stated by counsel for the appellant that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is stated that opposite party no.2/informant/mother of the victim, lodged the FIR in issue on 27.06.2023 alleging therein that the appellant enticed away her minor daughter and also levelled allegations against the mother of the appellant, however, after due investigation the chargesheet has been filed only against the appellant, under Section 363/366 IPC.

¶12

It is further stated that the offence as indicated in the FIR as also in the charge-sheet is not made out against the appellant, for the reason that the victim before the Investigating Officer stated that on account of ill treatment of informant (mother of victim), she her own free volition left her parental house and went to Kundali, Haryana and where she stayed in the rental room for about two months and also performed job in a company and nobody enticed her. Victim also denied the fact pertaining to marriage.

¶13

It is further stated that in the same tune, the victim made statement before the court concerned in terms of Section 164 Cr.P.C.

¶14

It is further stated that name of appellant was indicated in the FIR only on account of the fact that victim once made a call to her mother from the mobile belonging to the appellant and only upon due consideration of this fact the charge-sheet has been filed against the appellant.

¶15

He lastly submitted that all the aforesaid aspects of the case were not considered by the trial court, as such, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and the appellant be enlarged on bail.

¶16

Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of counsel for the appellant.

¶17

Considered the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and all the relevant documents placed on record.

¶18

Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A., F.I.R., impugned order, as also the statement(s) of victim, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed.

¶19

Order dated 10.11.2023 passed by the Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act, 1989, Hardoi, in Bail Application No. 3305 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 265 of 2023 under Sections 363/366 I.P.C. and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Lonar, District-Hardoi, is hereby set aside.

¶20

Let appellant- Shivam Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of

¶21

the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :-

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence.

¶26

(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.

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

(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.

¶30

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

¶31

As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) 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(s) made in this order.

¶32

Order Date :- 14.5.2024

¶33

Jyoti/-

¶34

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

Shivam Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivam Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Heerawati Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko and 5 Others

Santram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Smt. Geeta Vs State of U.P. through Prin. Secy., Home Department Civil Secretariat, Lucknow and others

Man Singh Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

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

Shiva Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another