Sonu Alias Sumit vs State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 47

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5229 of 2024

Appellant :- Sonu Alias Sumit Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ronak Chaturvedi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sameer Khan

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the appellant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Shri Ronak Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the appellant; learned AGA for opposite party no.1; Shri Sameer Khan, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant to set aside the impugned order dated 23.4.2024, whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bulandshahr has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 246 of 2022, under Sections 323,325,307,452,504,506 IPC and Section 3(2) (v) SC/ST Act, Police Station Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahr.

¶8

This is the second criminal appeal of the appellant.The first criminal appeal of the appellant was rejected by order dated 5.5.2023.Thereafter appellant has unsuccessfully approached the trial court and is before this court again.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant is in jail since 22.3.2022. He has criminal history of fourteen cases.He has been acquitted in seven cases and on bail in other cases and in two cases he is not wanted.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellant has filed supplementary affidavit stating that statements of all the injured witnesses and informant have been recorded before the trial court. There is no possibility of tampering with the prosecution witnesses.Keeping

¶11

in view long incarceration, the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the appellant and submitted that keeping in view of the long criminal history of the appellant, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. The informant and his son are living away from Bulandshahr because of fear of appellant.

¶13

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the court below and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submits that the allegations levelled are very serious in nature. 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.

¶14

Keeping in view the long incarceration of the appellant ,he is directed to be enlarged on interim bail for the period of three months .

¶15

Let appellant,Sonu Alias Sumit be released on interim bail in the aforesaid case crime number for period of three months 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:

¶16

(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.

¶17

(ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. His conduct is under watch .

¶18

(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.

¶19

(iv) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the

¶20

dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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.

¶25

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.

¶26

List this case on 8.5.2025 .

¶27

Order Date :- 6.2.2025

¶28

Atul kr. sri.

¶29

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

Sonu Alias Sumit v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu Alias Sumit 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Pravesh Rajbhar vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Tejveer and Another vs Smt. Sarita Tiwari, Director, State Council for Education Research and Training, Lucknow

Yojna Tyagi and 4 Others vs Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. and 2 Others

Kinnar Singh and 5 Others vs State of U.P.

Smt. Sunita Shukla vs State of U.P. Ans 4 Others