Ravinath vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:5053

Court No. - 47

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 12204 of 2024

Appellant :- Ravinath Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Indrakesh Kumar Sharma,Sanjay Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Sri Deepak Kumar Tripathi, has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This criminal appeal has been filed by the learned counsel for the appellant under Section 14-A (2) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for setting aside the impugned order dated 17.09.2024 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act, Sant Kabir Nagar in S.S.T No. 322 of 2020(State Vs. Ram Achal and others), Case Crime No.224 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 452, 504, 302, 506, 308 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Mahuli, District Sant Kabir Nagar.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the coaccused, Hariom, has been granted bail by this Court on 16.12.2024 in Criminal Appeal No. 3925 of 2021. The case of the appellant stands on identical footing, hence the appellant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity for the reasons given in criminal appeal of co-accused. The appellant is languishing in jail since 30.07.2020

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the appellant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the court below has not properly considered the facts of the case. Hence, in view of the above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the court below dated 17.09.2024 is, hereby, set aside.

¶12

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; appellant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Let appellant, Ravinath , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶14

(i) 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.

¶15

(ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶16

(iii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.

¶17

(iv) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.

¶18

(v) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶19

(vi) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a

¶21

ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed in accordance with law.

¶22

The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the appellant, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶23

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶24

The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶25

Order Date :- 9.1.2025 Abhishek

¶26

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravinath v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravinath v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

X Minor vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ajay Yadav and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Prakash Gupta vs State of U.P. and Another

Juvenile X vs State of U.P. and Another

Jai Prakash vs State of U.P. and Another

Shakir Ali vs State of U.P. and Another