Allowed

Firoz @ Chotu v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Aug 2024CRLA/8033/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal appeal against a bail rejection order in a case under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act involving IPC Sections 354, 452, 504, 506. The court set aside the below order and granted bail.

What did the court decide?

The appellant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties on verification of sureties subject to five conditions including not tampering with evidence.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:176424

¶2

Court No. - 83

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8033 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Firoz @ Chotu Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Salman Ahmad Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

¶6

List revised. No one is present on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 despite service of notice.

¶7

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

¶8

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 29.07.2024 passed by the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Jalaun at Orai in Bail Application No. 31/2024 (Firoz @ Chotu Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 46 of 2024, under Sections 354, 452, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Churkhi, District Jalaun.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the FIR has been registered u/s 354 Cr.P.C. but the prosecutrix in her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P,C., has not made any allegation regarding molestation nor it is substantiated with the medical report. It is lastly submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 26.06.2024 having no criminal history.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 opposed the prayer for bail and could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶11

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.

¶12

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, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a fit 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- Firoz @ Chotu involved in Case Crime No. 46 of 2024, under Sections 354, 452, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(2) (Va) of SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Churkhi, District Jalaun 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 :- 11.11.2024 Nisha

¶22

Digitally signed by :- nisha kumari High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Firoz @ Chotu v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Firoz @ Chotu 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

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

Urmila Devi vs State of Up 6 Others

Radharaman and Other vs State of Up and Another

Indresh Kumar Shukla vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shiv Shankar Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Sartaz and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another