Allowed

Ashish Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Govt. Lko.

Allahabad HC19 Dec 2024CRLA/3754/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of the appellant convicted under Sections 304, 323, 201, and 504 IPC. Finding that the First Information Report was based on hearsay and witnesses did not identify the appellant, the Court enlarged him on bail subject to personal bonds and two sureties, directing deposit of the trial fine.

What did the court decide?

Accused-appellant Ashish Singh released on bail on furnishing personal bonds and two sureties, subject to conditions including deposit of trial fine.

Ashish Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Govt. Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 14

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3754 of 2024

¶3

Appellant :- Ashish Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Govt. Lko. Counsel for Appellant :- S M Singh Royekwar,Vaibhav Saxena Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

¶5

(Order on C.M. Application No.1 of 2024 : First Bail Application)

¶6

1. Objection filed today by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

¶7

2. Heard Sri S.M. Singh Royekwar, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

3. The instant application seeking suspension of sentence has been filed by the appellant/applicant- Ashish Singh, who has been convicted in Sessions Trial No.667 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No.26 of 2015, under Sections 323, 304, 201, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Gudamba, District Lucknow.

¶9

4. Submission of learned counsel for the appellant/applicant is that the accused-applicant/ appellant is innocent, who has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some ulterior reasons. He has further submitted that the finding of guilt of accused appellant/applicant recorded by the learned trial court is against the weight of evidence, which is based on surmises and conjectures, therefore, the same is perverse.

¶10

5. His further submission is that the first information report was lodged by Amit Singh (P.W.1) who has stated that he was informed about this incident on 26.01.2015 at about 6 a.m. in the morning by one Ratan Chaubey, who is not the eyewitness of the incident.

¶11

6. His further submission is that P.W.2- Mohd.

¶12

Sakib and P.W.3- Jaigam Kha have not identified the appellant/applicant in committing the alleged offence which is apparent from their cross examination, whereas, P.W.3- Jaigam Kha has also not stated specifically about the role of the present appellant/applicant. He thus submits that role of the present appellant is distinguishable from other co-convicts of this case.

¶13

7. His further submission is that the accusedappellant/ applicant was on bail during trial and he has never misused the liberty of bail granted to him during trial. He has further submitted that the appellant/applicant is in jail since 13.11.2024 and he has no criminal history.

¶14

8. Learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant has concluded his submission by submitting that in case, the appellant/ applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall also cooperate with this Court in getting the present criminal appeal decided expeditiously. Therefore, the accused-appellant/ applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of this appeal.

¶15

9. Per Contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail by submitting that the accused-applicant/ appellant has been convicted vide impugned judgement and order dated 13.11.2024, which is based on proper analysis of evidence available on record. Therefore, he prays that the application for bail deserves to be rejected. However, he has been unable to dispute the aforesaid factual submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant/ applicant.

¶16

10. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant/applicant, learned A.G.A. as well as upon perusal of record, it transpires that the F.I.R. of the incident was lodged by Amit Singh (P.W.1), who has stated that he was informed about the incident by Ratan Chaubey, who is not the eyewitness of the alleged incident. Prima facie, it appears that the accused appellant/applicant has not been identified by P.W.2 whereas P.W.3 has not stated anything specifically about his role.

¶17

Appellant was on bail during trial and did not misuse the liberty of bail granted to him. Appellant/applicant is in jail since 13.11.2024 and he has no criminal history. As there is no likelihood of the appeal being heard in the near future, the accused/appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of this appeal.

¶18

11. Thus, having regard to overall facts and circumstances of this case and also keeping in view the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, a case for bail is made out. The instant application seeking suspension of sentence is, thus, allowed .

¶19

12. Let the accused-appellant/ applicant, namely, Ashish Singh be released on bail on his furnishing the personal bonds and two sureties each in like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions :-

¶20

(i) The appellant/ applicant shall cooperate in the early disposal of appeal without seeking any adjournment.

¶21

(ii) The appellant/ applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶22

13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶23

14. The appellant/ applicant shall deposit the entire amount of fine imposed against him by the learned trial court vide impugned judgment and order dated 13.11.2024 within a period of four weeks from the date he is released on bail under this order.

¶24

15. It is made clear that this Court has, however, not made any observation on the merits of the appeal.

¶25

16. As soon as personal bond and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the trial court concerned to be kept on record of this

¶26

appeal.

¶27

(Order on Appeal)

¶28

17. List this appeal after two weeks .

¶29

(Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J.)

¶30

Order Date :- 19.12.2024 Shubhankar

¶31

Digitally signed by :- SHUBHANKAR THAKUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ashish Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Govt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Govt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Juvenile X (Minor) Thru. His Natural Guardian Father vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home , Lko. and 3 Others

Saud Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Suman Kanaujiya vs State of U.P. and and 3 Others

Ajay @ Guddu and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Shaiki @ Rohit Singh @ Rohit Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko.

Vikas Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.