Allowed

Devanand Lodhi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Oct 2024CRLA/5388/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal appeal under the SC/ST Act regarding bail in an offence under IPC 363, 366 and SC/ST Act 3(2)(V), the High Court set aside the trial court's rejection of bail, finding the order suffered from infirmity and illegality as the appellant had made out a case for release.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order setting aside; Appellant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties; Standard bail conditions imposed.

Devanand Lodhi vs State of U.P. — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:167851

¶2

Court No. - 83

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5388 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Devanand Lodhi Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Amitesh Kumar Srivastava,Sunita Chauhan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

¶6

List revised. Despite service of notice, no one has put in appearance on behalf of the opposite party no.2.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the 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 release the applicant/appellant on bail and the impugned judgement and order dated 02.05.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST (PA) Act, Auraiya in Case Crime No.09 of 2024 (Devanand vs. State of U.P.) in Bail No. 754 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of Scheduled Cast/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station Ayana, District Auraiya, during the pendency of the aforesaid criminal appeal.

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It has been further submitted that as per Educational Certificate, the victim was minor. She left her house on her own will and accord. In her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she stated that no offence of sexual assault has taken place. She refused undergo medical examination. Appellant is in jail since 23.02.2024, having no criminal history. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.

¶10

On the other hand, learned learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record

¶12

including the impugned order carefully.

¶13

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The learned 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.

¶14

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

¶15

Let the appellant Devanand Lodhi involved in Case Crime No.09 of 2024 (Devanand vs. State of U.P.) in Bail No. 754 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of Scheduled Cast/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station Ayana, District Auraiya be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two 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.

¶16

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

¶17

The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 22.10.2024

¶23

Monika

¶24

Digitally signed by :- MONIKA KESARWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Devanand Lodhi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devanand Lodhi v. State of U.P.

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

Satish Sharma Alias Kaluwa vs State of U.P. and Another

Lokesh Sharma and Another vs State of Up and Another

Ramveer Singh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shahjeen vs State of Up and Another

Smt Meena Devi vs State of Up and 4 Others

Tabrez Alam vs State of U.P. and Another