Vishal vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:57353

Court No. - 80

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 567 of 2025

Appellant :- Vishal Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Bhawana Mishra,Harish Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Office report dated 16.04.2025 shows that notice has been served upon opposite party No.2 personally.

¶7

This is the third criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Vishal with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 10.12.2024 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Saharanpur and to release the appellant on bail in case crime No.251 of 2024 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 504, 506, 307 IPC and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST (P.A.) Act, P.S. Sadar Bazar, District Saharanpur.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned AGA and perused the entire record.

¶9

It is submitted by 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. It is further submitted that co-accused persons namely Ankur Kashyap, Vinay Kumar, Ajay Kumar @ Ajju, Pravesh @ Guddu, Abhishek @ Bakra, Ankur Singh and Rohit @ Lefti have been released on bail by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.11974 of 2024, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.35216 of 2024, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.41059 of 2024, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.41045 of 2024, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.28311 of 2024, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.43261 of 2024 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.42897 of 2024 respectively. It is further submitted that no specific role has been assigned to the present appellant, however, co-accused Rohit @ Lefti was assigned specific role who has been released on bail. The present appellant having no criminal antecedent to his credit is also entitled to be released on bail on the

¶10

ground of parity. The appellant is in jail since 08.05.2024. It is lastly submitted that the impugned orders rejecting the bail applications of the appellant suffer from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA vehementally opposing the present appeal and submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to scheduled caste community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned orders but however, he could not dispute this factual aspect of the matter that co-accused persons have been released on bail.

¶12

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.

¶13

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, the fact that no specific role has been assigned to the appellant and other co-accused persons have been released on bail, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court concerned erred in rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

¶14

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

¶15

Let the aforesaid appellant involved in the aforesaid case crime number 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.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

(iv). The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the

¶20

offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶21

(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.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶23

Order Date :- 18.4.2025 R.S. Tiwari

¶24

Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vishal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Komal Rajput vs State of U.P. and Another

Nidhi vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shashi Kala vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Irsad vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahendra Singh vs State of U.P.

Durga Prasad vs State of U.P.