Alakhram @ Alok Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:12538

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 704 of 2025

Appellant :- Alakhram @ Alok Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Anand Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Vakalatnama filed by Gulam Rabbani, Advocate on behalf of respondent nos.2 and 3 is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the private respondents and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant seeking following reliefs:-

¶9

"Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the instant criminal appeal and quash/set-aside the impugned order dated 24.1.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional Sessiojns Judge, Balrampur in Bail Application No.228/2024 (Alakhram @ Alok Versus State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No.290/2024, under sections 103(1), 3(5) BNS and section 3 (2)(v) SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Balrampur, as contained in Annexure No.1 to this criminal appeal in the interest of justice.

¶10

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to enlarge the applicant/appellant on bail in Case Crime No.290/2024, under sections 103(1), 3(5) BNS and section 3 (2)(v) SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Balrampur, during pendency of trial in the interest of justice."

¶11

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case being friend of Suraj. He further submits that Ramlal was a very cruel person and was habitual in taking liquor, hence, his mother- Lakhraji transferred her property in the name of Poonam w/o Ramlal (daughter-in-law of Lakhraji) and due to cruel behavior of Ramlal, she was residing at her sister's house. He next submits that on the date of incident, Ramlal killed his mother- Lakhraji as he was drunken condition, thereafter, he also caused selfinjury on his left wrist with sharp edged weapon and later on he also died. During the course of investigation, prosecution developed a case on the basis of confessional statements of the

¶12

appellant, Suraj s/o Ramlal and Savitri w/o Suraj that the appellant and Suraj caught Ramlal and then Savitri caused alleged ante-mortem injury to Ramlal, after which, he died.

¶13

It is also submitted that this is highly impossible that when two persons caught a man in standing position and caused injury in his left wrist as mentioned in the postmortem injury. The charge-sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer on the basis of confessional statements. It is lastly submitted that the appellant is in jail since 18.10.2024 and all these facts were not considered by learned trial Court and rejected the bail application of the appellant, hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appellant is entitled for bail.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the private respondents vehemently opposes the prayer of the appellant. However, they do not dispute the fact that the charge-sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer on the basis of confessional statements.

¶15

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, postmortem report of Ramlal including statement of Poonam w/o Ramlal as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that the charge-sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer on the basis of confessional statements of the appellant and other co-accused persons. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appellant is entitled for bail.

¶16

Resultantly, in view of the above facts and circumstances of the case as well as 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 . The impugned order dated 24.1.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional Sessiojns Judge, Balrampur in Bail Application No.228/2024 is hereby set aside.

¶17

Let the appellant- Alakhram @ Alok involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(iii) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the appellant 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.

¶21

(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 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 against him in accordance with law.

¶22

Office is directed to communicate this order to the trial court, forthwith.

¶23

Order Date :- 3.3.2025 Arpan

¶24

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

Alakhram @ Alok v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alakhram @ Alok v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

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

Vakeel Khan Alias Vakeel Sunder Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Pankaj Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Ram Kishor and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ram Charan Nishad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Km. Sanskrati through his mother Pooja Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and others

Pooja Rawat Thru. Her Husband Arvind Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Others