Saurabh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:13925

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 441 of 2025

Appellant :- Saurabh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sheo Prakash Singh,Pradeep Rai Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Mahendra Pratap Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel appearing for the complainant.

¶8

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 18.1.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Court No.2, Unnao in Bail Application No. 64 of 2025 arising out of F.I.R. No. 74 of 2023, under Sections 147, 323, 364, 302, 34 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Asiwan, District Unnao.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was falsely implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 20.6.2023. He further submits that first criminal appeal was rejected with the direction to the trial court to conclude the trial expeditiously within a period of five months but till today out of 25, only 4 witnesses have been examined. He also submits that all the four witnesses of fact have not supported the prosecution version and in near future there is no possibility of conclusion of trial. It is, thus, submitted that appellant, who is in jail since 20.6.2023, is entitled for bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently oppose the prayer of the appellant but they do not dispute the fact that direction was issued at the time of deciding first criminal appeal to conclude the trial within a period of five months but till today, only four

¶11

witnesses have been examined and they have not supported the prosecution version.

¶12

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the complainant and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, it is evident that till today out of 25, only four witnesses have been examined and they have not supported the prosecution version.

¶13

In view of above facts and circumstances as also keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed .

¶14

Order dated 18.1.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Court No.2, Unnao in Bail Application No. 64 of 2025 arising out of F.I.R. No. 74 of 2023, under Sections 147, 323, 364, 302, 34 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Asiwan, District Unnao, is hereby set aside.

¶15

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

¶16

(i) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶17

(ii) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(iii) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his

¶19

presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(iv) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant 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 against him in accordance with law.

¶21

Order Date :- 6.3.2025

¶22

Gaurav/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Saurabh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh 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

Ramcharan Chauhan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Raghuvir Singh @ Bhola Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Shravan Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko

Ram Pyare vs Sri Rajesh Kumar Verma the Assistant Collector / Tahsildar, District Ayodhya

Dr. Arvind Kumar Verma and 6 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Tribal Development Lko. and 6 Others

Uttam Kumar @ Uttam Kumar Saini Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secy. Home Lko. and Another