Allowed

Tafsheer Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2024CRLA/4203/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act. Setting aside the trial court's bail rejection, the bench granted bail to the appellant, who had been in custody since March 2023 with no charges framed, noting the absence of criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to appellant on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to standard conditions.

Tafsheer Ahmad vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:108521

¶2

Court No. - 82

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4203 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Tafsheer Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Krishna Dev Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- Devendra Mani Tiwari,G.A.,Sarvesh Chaturvedi

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

This criminal appeal was nominated by the Hon'ble Chief Justice.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for both the parties as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶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 23.02.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), .

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that in this case he is innocent and had committed no offence but was falsely implicated in this case with other co-accused persons those have already been granted bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and also by this Bench. It is further submitted that appellant is in jail since 28.03.2023 and till now even charge has also not been framed by the learned court but dates have been fixed for appearance of accused persons. The appellant is languishing in jail and trial is being delayed, therefore, request to release the appellant on bail. It is also submitted that the case of appellant is on better footing than that of other co-accused persons and having no any criminal antecedent. All these facts were not taken into consideration by the learned trial court while rejecting the second bail on 23.02.2024 which cannot be said to be lawful, therefore, request to set aside the order passed by the learned Special Judge dated 23.02.2024 and allow the appeal.

¶10

Learned counsel for the respondent/ complainant as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that all these facts were well considered by the learned trial court as well as this Court in first bail. There is no any other new ground to grant bail. The order passed by the learned

¶11

Special Judge in second bail application cannot be said to be illegal.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record, since appellant is languishing in jail from 28.03.2023 and till now even charge has also not been framed before the learned trial court and there is no any criminal antecedent against the appellant, therefore, case for bail is made out., therefore, the order passed by the learned trial court cannot be said to be lawful and is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is to be allowed .

¶13

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

¶14

Let the appellant Tafsheer Ahmad involved in Case Crime No. 90 of 2023 under Sections 376-D I.P.C. and 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act, Police Station Fatehganj Pashchimi, District Bareilly be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶15

The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶17

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

¶18

The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶19

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.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶21

Order Date :- 4.7.2024 Suraj Srivastav

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tafsheer Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tafsheer Ahmad v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Similar cases

Juvenile X Thru. His Natural Guardian Father Y vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Another

Aryan Gupta vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Indra Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Deptt. of Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Master Shivansh Mishra, Thru. His Father Vishnu Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Kaptan vs State of Up and Another

Sugriv vs State of U.P. and 4 Others