Allowed

Vansh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2024CRLA/7537/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a criminal appeal against an order rejecting bail under the SC/ST Act, 1989, setting aside the lower court's decision and releasing the appellant on bail with heavy sureties and strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

The impugned bail rejection order was set aside; the appellant was released on bail with a personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to specified conditions.

Vansh vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:181171

¶2

Court No. - 83

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7537 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Vansh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed against the bail rejection order dated 24.7.2024 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Muzaffar Nagar in Bail Application No.3015 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No.270 of 2024, under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 196, 115((2), 118(1), 131, 352 of B.N.S. and Sections 3(2)(v)(ka), 3(1)(r), 3(1) (s) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Khatauli, District Muzaffar Nagar.

¶8

The main submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant/applicant has been falsely implicated. The alleged dispute took place between the parties for trivial reasons. The injuries caused are simple in nature and maximum sentence provided for the offences is punishable upto seven years. The appellant is languishing in jail since 15.07.2024 and there is no criminal history against the appellant except the present case. 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.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶10

I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully.

¶11

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of

¶12

the accused, severity of punishment, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below 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.

¶13

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

¶14

Let the appellant-Vansh involved in Case Crime No.270 of 2024, under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 196, 115((2), 118(1), 131, 352 of B.N.S. and Sections 3(2)(v)(ka), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Khatauli, District Muzaffar Nagar. , Police Station Khatauli, District Muzaffar Nagar, 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 :- 19.11.2024 m.a.

¶22

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AYYUB High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vansh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vansh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharmendra Kumar vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Shiva @ Navnet Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Shahbaz vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Pintu @ Kanhaiya vs State of U.P. and Another

Tinu Khair vs State of U.P. and 5 Others