High Court · 2025

Appellant :- Suraj 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.,Gulam Rabbani Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

1. Counter affidavit filed by the learned AGA in the Court today is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Anand Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Badrul Hasan, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Gulam Rabbani, learned counsel appearing for the private opposite party Nos. 2 & 3 and perused the record.

3. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the order dated 14.02.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional Session Judge, Balrampur in Bail Application No. 12/2025, arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 290 of 2024, under Sections- 103(1), 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Balrampur, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected.

4. While pressing the instant application for bail, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case.

5. He further stated that co-accused namely Alakhram @ Alok has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 03.03.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 704 of 2025. Copy of bail order of co-accused Alakhram @ Alok is on record as Annexure No. 15 to the instant appeal. In these circumstances, the appellant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

6. Relevant portion of the order dated 03.03.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 704 of 2025 on reproduction reads as under:- "4. 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 self-injury 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 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. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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:- "

7. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel including that co-accused have already been released on bail by this Court.

8. Upon due consideration of arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents and the facts & circumstances of the case including the role attributed to the appellant as also that co-accused have already been released on bail by this Court and keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

9. Order dated 14.02.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional Session Judge, Balrampur in Bail Application No. 12/2025, arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 290 of 2024, under Sections- 103(1), 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Balrampur, is hereby set aside.

10. Let the appellant- Suraj be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (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 will 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.P.C.

11. 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.

12. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations 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 made in this order. Order Date :- 4.7.2025 Arun/- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Appellant :- Suraj 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.,Gulam Rabbani Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

1. Counter affidavit filed by the learned AGA in the Court today is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Anand Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Badrul Hasan, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Gulam Rabbani, learned counsel appearing for the private opposite party Nos. 2 & 3 and perused the record.

3. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the order dated 14.02.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional Session Judge, Balrampur in Bail Application No. 12/2025, arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 290 of 2024, under Sections- 103(1), 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Balrampur, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected.

4. While pressing the instant application for bail, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case.

5. He further stated that co-accused namely Alakhram @ Alok has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 03.03.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 704 of 2025. Copy of bail order of co-accused Alakhram @ Alok is on record as Annexure No. 15 to the instant appeal. In these circumstances, the appellant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

6. Relevant portion of the order dated 03.03.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 704 of 2025 on reproduction reads as under:- "4. 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 self-injury 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 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. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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:- "

7. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel including that co-accused have already been released on bail by this Court.

8. Upon due consideration of arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents and the facts & circumstances of the case including the role attributed to the appellant as also that co-accused have already been released on bail by this Court and keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

9. Order dated 14.02.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional Session Judge, Balrampur in Bail Application No. 12/2025, arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 290 of 2024, under Sections- 103(1), 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Balrampur, is hereby set aside.

10. Let the appellant- Suraj be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (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 will 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.P.C.

11. 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.

12. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations 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 made in this order. Order Date :- 4.7.2025 Arun/- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench