Allowed

Saurabh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2024CRLA/3978/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal appeal against a bail rejection order under the SC/ST Act and IPC. The court set aside the impugned order and granted bail to the appellant, noting his non-inclusion in the F.I.R., lack of direct evidence, parity with co-accused, and absence of criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to the appellant on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of non-interference and court appearance.

Saurabh vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:128841

¶2

Court No. - 65

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3978 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Saurabh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vikas Chauhan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶6

Matter is taken up in the revised call.

¶7

Shri Shrawan Kumar Dubey, learned AGA on the basis of instructions submits that the notices upon the respondents have been served in light of the judgment rendered by this Court in Ajeet Chaudhary vs. State of U.P. & Another reported at 2021 (1) ADJ 559.

¶8

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 22.03.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Aligarh in bail application bearing No.1375 of 2024 (Saurabh and another v. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No.677 of 2023, under Sections 302, 364-A, 507 I.P.C., and Section 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Akarabad, DistrictAligarh. The applicant-appellant is in jail since 06.12.2023.

¶9

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the

¶10

learned trial court on 22.03.2024.

¶11

The following arguments made by Shri Vikas Chauhan, learned counsel behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Shravan Kumar Dubey, learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶12

The applicant was not named in the F.I.R.

¶13

There is no direct evidence or eye witness evidence against the applicant.

¶14

The chain of incriminating circumstances against the applicant is not complete.

¶15

The applicant was nominated in the statement of a police informer whose identity is undisclosed and credentials are uncertain. The statement is based on hearsay.

¶16

The role of the applicant is distinguishable from the principal offender-Sudheer who had made a ransom call from his mobile phone.

¶17

No incriminating article has been recovered from the applicant.

¶18

Learned counsel for the applicant claims congruency in role and seeks parity in relief granted to other co-accused who has been enlarged on bail by this Court by order dated 04.06.2024 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.

¶19

4248 of 2024.

¶20

The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶21

In the light of the preceding discussion, facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the nature of the offence and evidence the appellant has made out a case for bail. The trial court erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set aside and the appeal is to be allowed.

¶22

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set aside.

¶23

Let the appellant- Saurabh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶24

(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

¶25

(ii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶26

The learned trial court is directed to fix the sureties after due application of mind in light of the judgement rendered by this Court in Arvind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru.

¶27

Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. (Application U/S 482 No.2613 of 2023) .

¶28

The learned trial court shall ensure that the right of bail of the applicant granted by this Court is not frustrated by arbitrary demands of sureties or onerous conditions which are unrelated to the socioeconomic status of the applicant.

¶29

Order Date :- 8.8.2024 Dhananjai

¶30

Digitally signed by :- DHANANJAI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Saurabh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh v. State of U.P. 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

Charu vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Pankaj Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Dayashankar Yadav vs State of Up and Another

Rajendra Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Nootan vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Devendra Singh vs State of Up and Another