Allowed¶15

Samashuddin v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Apr 2025CRLA/789/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail appeal under S. 14-A(2) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act; charges Ss. 363, 366 IPC and 3(2)(v), 3(2)(5A) SC/ST Act; case crime no.121 of 2024, P.S. Jaswant Nagar, District Etawah; bail rejection by Special Judge dated 16.12.2024 set aside; no sexual assault on victim; appellant in custody since 22.06.2024; release on personal bond and two sureties with conditions; single Judge Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.; decision date 18.4.2025; neutral citation 2025:AHC:57444.

What did the court decide?

Impugned bail rejection order set aside; appellant to 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 stated conditions; sureties to be verified before issuance of the release order. ¶15

Samashuddin Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the bail rejection order dated 16.12.2024 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Etawah should be set aside and the appellant released on bail in case crime no.121 of 2024.

¶7

Court's answer

Having regard to the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and the absence of any sexual assault, the appellant made out a case for bail; the Special Judge erred in rejecting the bail application and the impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and is liable to be set aside.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

The appeal is allowed and the impugned bail-rejection order is set aside; the appellant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions (non-tampering with evidence, non-intimidation of witnesses, appearance before the trial court, and no repetition of offences), failing which the prosecution may move for cancellation of bail.

¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2), Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Allahabad High Court: appeal against order dated 16.12.2024 of the Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Etawah rejecting bail of the appellant in case crime no.121 of 2024 (Sections 363, 366 IPC and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(5A) SC/ST Act, P.S. Jaswant Nagar, District Etawah), alleging abduction of the informant's minor sister who remained with the appellant for about four days. Holding that no sexual assault was made on the victim and considering the nature of the offence, evidence and complicity of the accused, the Court held the appellant made out a case for bail, found infirmity and illegality in the impugned order, set it aside, and directed release on bail on a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering, intimidation, absence from trial and repetition of offences.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:57444

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 789 of 2025

¶4

Appellant :- Samashuddin Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Shiv Prasad Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Office report shows that notice has been served upon opposite party No.2 through family member.

¶7

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Samashuddin with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 16.12.2024 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Etawah and to release the appellant on bail in case crime no.121 of 2024 under Sections 363, 366 IPC and Section 3(2)(V), 3 (2)(5A) of SC/ST (P.A.) Act, P.S. Jaswant Nagar, District Etawah.

¶8

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

¶9

The minor sister of the informant was abducted by the major accused/appellant and she remained with him for about four days. Earlier an FIR under Section 363 IPC was lodged which was subsequently altered in Section 363 & 366 IPC and Section 3 (2) (5A) of SC/ST Act.

¶10

It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the whole prosecution story is bogus. Actually the victim of this case is a major girl and she on her own will left her house and went with the appellant, however, in her statement under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., the victim has made a categorical statement that no physical assault was made with her by the present appellant. It is also submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 22.06.2024 and he is a family person having no criminal history to his credit.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA vehementally opposing the present appeal and submitted that the victim is a minor girl who was

¶12

abducted by the major appellant from her own house and kept with him for about four days, however, he could not dispute the factual aspect of the matter that no physical/sexual assault was made by the appellant with the victim of this case.

¶13

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.

¶14

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 sexual assault has been made to the appellant, 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.

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶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

¶23

prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶24

Order Date :- 18.4.2025 R.S. Tiwari

¶25

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

Samashuddin v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samashuddin 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