Anand Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:5483

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 36 of 2025

Appellant :- Anand Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Arun Sinha,Ram Chandra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Notice has been served on the opposite party no.2/informant though no one appeared on his behalf.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as alongwith learned A.G.A. and perused the entire 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 set aside the bail rejection order dated 19.11.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Barabanki.

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed the present offence. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. No specific role has been assigned to the appellant. The ingredients for offence u/s 108 B.N.S. are not made out at all. There is no element of incitement on the part of the appellant. Further submitted that the deceased committed suicide by hanging on 19.08.2024 and present F.I.R. was lodged on 28.08.2024 after deliberation and concoction. It is also submitted that an application was given to the Inspector General, Police Lucknow on 23.08.2024 for commission of rape by six persons with the deceased. After concoction and due to ulterior motive present F.I.R. was lodged with false allegations. Entire allegations levelled in the F.I.R. and in the statement are false. The Court below while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. Learned counsel for the appellant also referred to the amended provisions of SC/ST Act. Appellant is in jail since 17.10.2024. 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

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid.

¶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 case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order dated 19.11.2024 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- Anand Kumar involved in Case Crime No.553 of 2024, under Sections 108 B.N.S. (306 I.P.C.), 351(3) B.N.S. (506 I.P.C.), 352 B.N.S. (504 I.P.C.) and 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, Police Station Mohammadpur Khala, District Barabanki, 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 :- 28.1.2025 Ashok Gupta

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anand Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Guddu Singh @ Jitendra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Afza Fatima Thru. Her Husband Sri Mohd. Amir Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 5 Others

Akash Giri Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Kamal Raj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Harsh Srivastava @ Akash vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Dharmendra Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others