Allowed

Sada Hussian v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 May 2025CRLA/4873/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal under Section 14-A(2) SC/ST Act against rejection of bail in a murder case registered under BNS and SC/ST Act provisions. Court found motive inconsistent and allowed the appeal, set aside bail rejection, and released the appellant on bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned bail rejection order set aside; appellant released on bail on personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions.

Sada Hussian vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4873 of 2025

¶3

Sada Hussian

¶4

.....Appellant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s)	: A Kumar Srivastava, Mishra	Upendra Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 87

¶7

HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J.

¶8

Case called out in the revised call. None has appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2. Heard learned counsel for appellant and the learned AGA for State.

¶9

As per office report, notice has been served on opposite party no. 2, however, none has appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose the appeal.

¶10

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 15.04.2025 passed by Learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, KushiNagar at Padrauna, District KushiNagar arising out of Case Crime No.367/2024 ( S.T. No. 193/2025), under Sections 103(1), 238, 61(2), 315 B.N.S and section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act , at Police Station Tarya Sujan, District KushiNagar.

¶11

Informant-Ashok lodged an FIR against appellant-Sada Hussian and some unknown persons alleging that his brother Govind was taken away by the accused person on a motorcycle. All the accused murdered him and threw him on the railway track. He has alleged that the said murder was committed by appellant and his brother because deceased used to talk with cousin sister of Sada Hussian.

¶12

Learned counsel for appellant has submitted that informant has stated that the incident occurred on 19.2.2024. Dead body of deceased was found on railway track on the same date and accordingly the information was given to the police by railway authorities. Informant in the FIR has alleged that

¶13

CRLA No. 4873 of 2025

¶14

¶15

murder was committed because deceased used to talk with cousin sister of appellant. However, when his statement under Section 181 Cr.P.C. was recorded, he has stated that his sister Babita and appellant were in love relation which was resisted by deceased. He has also stated that appellant was jealous of deceased's lifestyle, expensive articles and his job. It was submitted that motive attributed by informant and other witnesses against the appellant is not consistent. Informant and other witnesses themselves have been unable to fix the motive against appellant. Attention was drawn towards the postmortem report, it was submitted that postmortem report itself indicates that deceased died after he met with an accident by train. Hence, appellant is entitled to bail.

¶16

Sri Acharya Rajesh Tripathi, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that injuries noted in the postmortem do not indicate that they were caused in a railway accident. It has been clearly stated by informant in the FIR that he himself saw the deceased going with appellant on 19.9.2024 along with the other accused person. In his statement before Investigating Officer, it has also been mentioned by him when they asked the deceased as to where he was going he stated that he was going with appellant and other accused persons. Hence, appellant is not entitled to bail.

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶18

Inquest report of deceased indicates that his body was mutilated and it also indicates that there were serious crush injury on his body parts. The alleged incident occurred on 19.2.2024 and FIR was lodged on 16.2.2024. Whatsoever motive has been attributed against the appellant by the informant and other witnesses is inconsistent.

¶19

I have considered the rival submissions so made and have gone through the entire record.

¶20

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 appellants have made out a case for bail.

¶21

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

¶22

Let the appellant- Sada Hussian involved in Case Crime No.367/2024 (

¶23

CRLA No. 4873 of 2025

¶24

¶25

S.T. No. 193/2025), under Sections 103(1), 238, 61(2), 315 B.N.S and section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act , at Police Station Tarya Sujan, District KushiNagar , be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two 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.

¶26

(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶27

(ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶28

(iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶29

(iv) 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.

¶30

(v) 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.

¶31

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the concerned Court shall be at liberty to take appropriate coercive action for appearance of the accused or to cancel the bail granted.

¶32

November 18, 2025 Mukesh

¶33

(Anil Kumar-X,J.)

¶34

Digitally signed by :- MUKESH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sada Hussian v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sada Hussian 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

Maithil Nemchandra Vishwakarma vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Devendra vs State of U.P. and Another

Dayashankar @ Ramashankar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shobhit Tyagi vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay @ Vijay Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Rakesh Kumar Maurya vs State of U.P. and 3 Others