Gulam Kadir Alias Vishal vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:1094

Court No. - 82

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9641 of 2024

Appellant :- Gulam Kadir Alias Vishal Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Akash Deep Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 12.9.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Gorakhpur.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned AGA and perused the entire record. Despite service of notice, none is present for the opposite party no.2.

¶8

As per prosecution story, on 27.07.2024 at about 4.30 P.M. a group of 20-25 miscreants carrying lathi, danda and other weapons came to the informant Ritik Kumar, made assault upon him, hurled abuses and threatened for life. When Ankit and Abhishek came to rescue, they were also beaten. In the said incident informant Ritik Kumar, Ankit and Abhishek sustained injuries and three cameras, one mobile phone and other articles were also taken away by the miscreants. F.I.R. was lodged and after completing the investigation, charge sheet has been submitted.

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent, he has not committed the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. It is further submitted that the appellant has been assigned no specific role for committing the alleged offence and neither any incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the appellant nor on his pointing out. The Court concerned while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in the right perspective and erred in passing the same. Appellant is in jail since 30.07.2024 having no criminal history. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting

¶10

interference by this Court.

¶11

On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but however could not dispute the fact that no specific role has been assigned to the present appellant.

¶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, no specific role of 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.

¶14

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

¶15

Let the appellant Gulam Kadir Alias Vishal involved in Case Crime No. 452 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 310(2), 317(3) B.N.S. and Section 3(1)R and 3(1)S, 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Gola, District Gorakhpur 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 offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶20

(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

¶21

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 :- 2.1.2025 Rmk.

¶24

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Gulam Kadir Alias Vishal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulam Kadir Alias 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sanjeev vs State of U.P. and Another

Prachi vs State of U.P. and Another

Nanka vs State of U.P. and Another

Pushpendra Sahu vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Rai Alias Pramod Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Prachi vs State of U.P. and Another