Allowed

Farooq @ Sharukh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Dec 2024CRLA/2160/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) SC/ST Act against denial of bail for murder and caste-atrocity offences. Court found the lower court failed to appreciate that the inquest report preceded the FIR and lacked corroboration, set aside the rejection and released appellant on bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond with two sureties; order rejecting bail set aside.

Farooq @ Sharukh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:81281

¶2

Court No. - 16

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2160 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Farooq @ Sharukh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vikas Sharma,Mohd. Karim,Syed Kamil Hasan,Vikas Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

None appears for the complainant although notices are served.

¶8

This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 14A (2) the Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to set aside the order dated 26.02.2024 passed in Bail application No.76/2024, arising out of case crime No.307/2023, under Sections 504, 506, 120-B, 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Pisawan, District Sitapur.

¶9

In the prosecution case it is alleged that in the night of 12.08.2023 at about 11:30 when the minor daughter of the complainant went outside for attending nature's call the appellant along with other co-accused persons caught hold the victim. The incident was seen by a neighbour women. After some time, complainant along with some villagers searched the victim and found her hanging body on a tree. The accused persons have threatened the complainant to kill him and his family members.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellant while pressing the appeal submits that, the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing as claimed by the prosecution has been committed by the appellant.

¶11

It is contended on behalf of the appellant that prior to this F.I.R. an information was received by the police on that information inquest was performed, the inquest report is on the record. He submits that the information was registered on G.D. No.8 and according to the inquest report, the victim on 12.08.2023 at about 11:30 went away from her home to ease out and after

¶12

some time she was found hanging on the tree. There was no allegation on the appellant or anyone else till the time of inquest and after thought F.I.R. has been lodged in which appellant has been framed. There was no eye witness to the incident. The case is of circumstantial evidence. No material under Section 107 IPC is available on record. The allegation of rape in the prosecution case has not been corroborated in the post mortem report which is on record. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. There is no other injury on the body of the victim. Appellant has no criminal history.

¶13

It is further submitted that, the appellant is languishing in jail in this matter since 13.08.2023. Charge-sheet in the matter has already been submitted. There is no likelihood that the appellant-applicant after release on bail may flee from the process of law or will misuse the liberty of bail granted by this Court.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for bail, but could not confront the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, inquest report and the entry made in G.D. No.8 regarding the incident earlier to the present F.I.R. and lack of corroborative evidence in the prosecution case and the fact that applicant has no criminal history but without commenting upon merits, I am of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. In view of above, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside.

¶16

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order dated 26.02.2024 passed in Bail application No.76/2024, arising out of case crime No.307/2023, under Sections 504, 506, 120-B, 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Pisawan, District Sitapur, is set aside.

¶17

Let the appellant-applicant Farooq @ Sharukh involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

(iii) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any

¶21

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.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

(vi) 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 applicant 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.

¶25

The pending application, if any, too stands disposed of.

¶26

Order Date :- 5.12.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶27

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Farooq @ Sharukh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Farooq @ Sharukh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Shatrohan @ Shatrughan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Anil Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Sandeep Kumar Verma Vs the State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others

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

Mohd. Suhail Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Dilip Soni @ Sonu Vs State of U.P. and Anr.