Allowed

Imran @ Patalu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2024CRLA/140/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the appeal against the denial of bail, relying on the principle of parity as a co-accused was already released on bail. The impugned order was set aside and the appellant was released on bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties.

Imran @ Patalu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:30619

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 140 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Imran @ Patalu Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Amitesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit is taken on record.

¶7

Case called out. No one appeared on behalf of the respondent No. 2. Learned AGA is present in the Court.

¶8

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

¶9

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the order dated 21.10.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No. 1638 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 70 of 2023, under Sections- 302, 201, 34 I.P.C. and Section- 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Bevana, District- Ambedkar Nagar.

¶10

While pressing the instant application for bail, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He says that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no witness of last seen in the present case.

¶11

He further stated that co-accused namely Irfan has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 03.04.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 3126 of 2023. Copy of bail order of co-accused placed before this Court is taken on record. In these circumstances, the appellant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

¶12

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 as also that co-accused has already been enlarged on bail.

¶13

Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents

¶14

Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances particularly that co-

¶15

accused has already been released on bail and 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 .

¶16

Order dated 21.10.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No. 1638 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 70 of 2023, under Sections- 302, 201, 34 I.P.C. and Section- 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Bevana, District- Ambedkar Nagar is hereby set aside.

¶17

Let the appellant- Imran @ Patalu 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 :-

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶25

(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.

¶26

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.

¶27

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.

¶28

Order Date :- 19.4.2024 Arun/-

¶29

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

Imran @ Patalu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Imran @ Patalu 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dashrath Vs Board of Revenue Lko. Thru. Member and Another

Sahaj Ram Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Bahraich and 2 Others

Ashok Kumar Agarwal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko.. and 2 Others

Chandrawati Vs Tahsildar, Tahsil-Milkipur. District-Ayodhya and Another

Purushottam Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Ram Kripal Vs Deputy Director of Consolidationdistt. Amethi and 5 Others