In criminal appeal under SC/ST Act,Allahabad High Court quashed order rejecting bail. Court held impugned order suffered infirmity and illegality allowing AI release on bail subject to conditions.
The appeal is allowed; the impugned bail rejection order is set aside. The appellant is granted bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:135607
Court No. - 86
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4256 of 2024
Appellant :- Ashu Chaubey Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Subhash Singh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
allegations made in the F.I.R. and even in the statements given by the eyewitnesses of the injured persons, no specific role has been assigned to the present appellant in the commission of the alleged crime. It is further submitted that none of the injured persons out of a total of five injured persons has assigned any specific role of assault or specific weapon to the present appellant. It is further submitted that although there are five injured persons, but as a matter of fact, all of them have received only simple injuries. It is further submitted that the injured Kanhaiya was referred for x-ray for one of his injuries, but in the x-ray report, no fracture was found. It is further submitted that the appellant has no criminal history to his credit. It is further submitted that the learned Special Court did not consider the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence on record in right perspective and bail application was rejected in a cursory manner. It is further submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 6.2.2024. It is also submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.
rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.
(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) 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.
(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.
Order Date :- 23.8.2024 Fhd
Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Special Court's rejection of bail applications in a caste-atrocity case.
Whether the appellant has made out a case for bail despite the serious nature of the offences charged.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Ashu Chaubey
State of U.P.
Nalin Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
