1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Jitendra And Another vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|21 February, 2019


Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1227 of 2019 Appellant :- Jitendra And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Garun Pal Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A., for the State. Perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14 A (1) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short "S.C./S.T. Act") has been filed challenging the cognizance order dated 16.1.2019 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Hathras, in Case No. 4 of 2019 (State Vs. Jitendra and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 379 of 2018 under Sections 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., and Section 3 (2) (5A) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station-Mursan, District-Hathras whereby appellants have been summoned in the aforesaid sections.
Learned counsel for the appellants contended that from perusal of the FIR, no offence is made out against the appellants.
Per contra, learned A.G.A., contended that there is no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the learned trial court.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the appellants.
Accordingly, I find no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the trial court and as such, this appeal stands dismissed.
However, none of the aforesaid offences against appellants is punishable with imprisonment for more than seven years. All the materials relevant for disposal of bail application is available on record before trial court/court concerned.
Accordingly, in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court and in view of the order passed by this Court in Smt. Sakeena and others Vs. State, and another reported in 2018 (2) ACR 2190, it is directed that in case the appellants file their bail application and also pray for interim bail, their prayer for interim bail shall be considered and decided on the same day, and the regular bail shall be decided thereafter by affording an opportunity of hearing to the victim or his dependent as per the mandate of Section 15A (5) S.C./S.T. Act.
For a period of 60 days from today or till the appellants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them.
Order Date :- 21.2.2019 Jaswant
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.

Jitendra And Another vs State Of U P And Another


High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

21 February, 2019
  • Umesh Chandra Tripathi
  • Garun Pal Singh