Akash and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:34440

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 789 of 2025

¶4

Appellant :- Akash And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Another

¶5

Counsel for Appellant :- Vineet Kumar Mishra,Mohd Kamal Khan,Vishal Verma

¶6

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Aakash Srivastava

¶7

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for appellants and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party No.1-State.

¶9

1A. As per office report dated 05.04.2025, opposite party no.2 has been served personally but has not put in appearance.

¶10

Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2) SC/ST Act against bail rejection order dated 20.02.2025 passed by Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.)Act, Hardoi in bail application No.404 of 2025 of appellants in case crime No.21 of 2025, under Section 115(2), 352, 351(3), 140(1), 127(2) BNS and Section 3(1)Da, 3(2)(v) S.C. & S.T. (PoA) Act, P.S. Sursa, District Hardoi.

¶11

As per contents of FIR, incident is said to have taken place on 30.01.2025 at about 10.00 A.M. when the nominated person Ram Lakhan alongwith co-accused is said to have abducted the informant and subsequently attacked and severely injured him.

¶12

It is submitted that appellants have been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against them which could be evident from the fact that they have not been named in the FIR and even a bare perusal of FIR clearly indicates that there is no aspect relatable to the SC/ST Act. It is only in the subsequent statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that a general allegation of caste based epithet having been made has been

¶13

alleged as an afterthought. It is submitted that even the injury report does not corroborate allegations levelled against appellants. It is submitted that appellants do not have any previous criminal history.

¶14

Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party-State has opposed the bail application with the submission that single injury indicated in injury report corroborates allegations levelled against them and charge-sheet has thereafter been filed. It is however admitted that appellants do not have any previous criminal history.

¶15

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties, perusal of material available on record and without commenting upon merits, it appears that there is certain contradiction in the contents of FIR with the statement of victim recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C., particularly with regard to allegations levelled under the SC/ST Act which would inquire consideration by trial court. The injury report also does not appear to support allegations levelled. Appellants are under incarceration since 30.01.2025. Appellants do not have any previous criminal history.

¶16

In view of above, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside. Accordingly appeal is allowed and the order dated 20.02.2025 is set aside.

¶17

Let appellants (Akash and Lali) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶18

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

¶19

(ii) The appellants will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶20

(iii) The appellants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

(iv) The appellants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall 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.

¶22

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

¶23

(vi) In case, the appellants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the appellants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

Order Date :- 4.6.2025 Subodh/-

¶25

Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Akash and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akash and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Sudha Pathak vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Bal Vikas Seva Evam Pustahar Lko. and 5 Others

Naseem Ahmad Khan Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs Lko. and Another

Prateek Srivastava Vs Smt. Akanksha Srivastava and Another

Munnu Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Akash and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Venus Chaudhary vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical and Health Deptt. Lko. and Another