Allahabad High Court
Case Details
Acts & Sections
HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. Vide order dated 21.11.2024, notice has been issued to opposite party no. 2 and as per office report, the same has been served on opposite party no. 2. Today when the case is taken up, neither counsel on behalf of opposite party no. 2 is present nor any counter has been filed, therefore, this Court has no option but to proceed in the matter to decide the instant appeal. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred against the impugned order dated 26.09.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gonda in Bail Application No. 1929 of 2024, CNR No. UPGD01-004756-2024 in Case Crime No. 225 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 238 of BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, POlice Station Dhaneypur, District Gonda, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that 2 CRLA No. 3657 of 2024 after four months of the alleged incident, the dead body of the deceased was recovered. He next submits that the appellant is 67 years old and no call details was prepared and there is only evidence with regard to motive and no other chain of circumstantial evidence is completed. He next submits that the alleged recovery of bicycle is made with the joint possession of the accused persons and there is no public witness of the incident. He next added that the appellant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 12.08.2024 and in case the appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall also fully cooperate with the trial. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case. For the aforesaid reasons, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the instant criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and consequently, the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer by submitting that the appellant is named in the FIR and he was involved in committing the offence alongwith other co-accused persons, therefore he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail and the instant criminal appeal deserves to be dismissed. However, he has been unable to dispute the other factual submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material available on record, including the allegations made in the FIR, it is apparent that there is no eye witness account and on the basis of previous enmity and motive only, the appellant is named in the FIR; no other chain of circumstantial evidence is complete; the alleged recovery of bicycle is made with the joint possession of the accused persons from the public place; appellant is 67 years old and no call detail is produced; the appellant is languishing in jail since 12.08.2024 and he has undertaken that in case he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and 3 CRLA No. 3657 of 2024 will cooperate with the trial and without expressing any opinion on merit, this Court is of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record, thus, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 26.09.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gonda in Bail Application No. 1929 of 2024, CNR No. UPGD01-004756- 2024 in Case Crime No. 225 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 238 of BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, POlice Station Dhaneypur, District Gonda, is hereby set aside. Let the appellant-Shobharam Maurya be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties relating to his family members to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to following additional conditions- (i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial (iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (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. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.PC. 4 CRLA No. 3657 of 2024 In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order. October 30, 2025 kkv/ (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.)
HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. Vide order dated 21.11.2024, notice has been issued to opposite party no. 2 and as per office report, the same has been served on opposite party no. 2. Today when the case is taken up, neither counsel on behalf of opposite party no. 2 is present nor any counter has been filed, therefore, this Court has no option but to proceed in the matter to decide the instant appeal. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred against the impugned order dated 26.09.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gonda in Bail Application No. 1929 of 2024, CNR No. UPGD01-004756-2024 in Case Crime No. 225 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 238 of BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, POlice Station Dhaneypur, District Gonda, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that 2 CRLA No. 3657 of 2024 after four months of the alleged incident, the dead body of the deceased was recovered. He next submits that the appellant is 67 years old and no call details was prepared and there is only evidence with regard to motive and no other chain of circumstantial evidence is completed. He next submits that the alleged recovery of bicycle is made with the joint possession of the accused persons and there is no public witness of the incident. He next added that the appellant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 12.08.2024 and in case the appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall also fully cooperate with the trial. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case. For the aforesaid reasons, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the instant criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and consequently, the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer by submitting that the appellant is named in the FIR and he was involved in committing the offence alongwith other co-accused persons, therefore he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail and the instant criminal appeal deserves to be dismissed. However, he has been unable to dispute the other factual submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material available on record, including the allegations made in the FIR, it is apparent that there is no eye witness account and on the basis of previous enmity and motive only, the appellant is named in the FIR; no other chain of circumstantial evidence is complete; the alleged recovery of bicycle is made with the joint possession of the accused persons from the public place; appellant is 67 years old and no call detail is produced; the appellant is languishing in jail since 12.08.2024 and he has undertaken that in case he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and 3 CRLA No. 3657 of 2024 will cooperate with the trial and without expressing any opinion on merit, this Court is of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record, thus, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 26.09.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gonda in Bail Application No. 1929 of 2024, CNR No. UPGD01-004756- 2024 in Case Crime No. 225 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 238 of BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, POlice Station Dhaneypur, District Gonda, is hereby set aside. Let the appellant-Shobharam Maurya be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties relating to his family members to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to following additional conditions- (i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial (iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (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. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.PC. 4 CRLA No. 3657 of 2024 In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order. October 30, 2025 kkv/ (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.)