Allahabad High Court
Abhishek Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 23 November, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:183400
Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8497 of 2024
Appellant :- Abhishek Singh
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Pankaj Kumar Dwivedi
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.
List revised. Despite service of notice, no one has put in appearance on behalf of the opposite party no.2.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 09.07.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, (S.C./S.T. Act), Varanasi in Case Crime No. 0543 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354Kha, 452, 376, 511 IPC and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) and 3(2)(V) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Chaubepur, District Varanasi.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It has further been submitted that the alleged incident did not take place within the public view and no caste based abusive language has been used in the public place. It has been argued that he had no intention to cause insult or intimidation to the first informant and the case is covered by the observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another, AIR (2020) SC 5584. The injuries caused to the victim are simple in nature. Appellant is languishing in jail since 17.05.2024, 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 interference by this Court.
On the other hand, learned learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
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.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The learned trial Court erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is to be allowed.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside.
Let the appellant Abhishek Singh involved in Case Crime No. 0543 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354Kha, 452, 376, 511 IPC and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) and 3(2)(V) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Chaubepur, District Varanasi. 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.
1. The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. 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.
5. 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.
Order Date :- 23.11.2024
Monika
