Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Salman Ahmad vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 July, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 532 of 2018 Appellant :- Salman Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Ajeet Kumar Srivastava,Ramanuj Tiwari,Ramanuj Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Daya Shankar
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Ajeet Kumar Srivastava and Ramanuj Tiwari, learned counsels for the appellant, Sri Daya Shankar, learned counsel for the respondent, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This criminal appeal has been filed by the learned counsel for the appellant under Section 14-A (2) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for setting aside the impugned order dated 03.01.2018 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Jaunpur in Case Crime No.273 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 3(1)Da, Dha of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Sarai Khawaja, District Jaunpur.
The allegations in the FIR against the appellant is that he has taken money on promise of providing job and thereafter not returned the amount. He has cheated the informant. It is argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The appellant is languishing in jail since 18.12.2017. There is criminal history of two cases of similar nature, one case under Gunda Act, one case under Gangster Act and one case under Section 174-A IPC.
Learned counsel for the informant has argued that in the bail application moved by the appellant before the court below, it is admitted that he has committed offences under Sections 504/506 IPC. Be that as it may, the offence under Section 504/506 IPC are non-cognizable and bailable. The appellant is already in jail for last more than seven months.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the appellant.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the sentence awarded to the appellant, I am of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let the appellant Salman Ahmad be released on bail in Case Crime No.273 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 3(1)Da, Dha of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Sarai Khawaja, District Jaunpur on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to condition under Section 437 Sub Section 3 of Chapter -33 of Cr.P.C.
The impugned order dated 03.01.2018 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Jaunpur, is, hereby, quashed.
The appeal is allowed.
Order Date :- 26.7.2018 Ruchi Agrahari
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Salman Ahmad vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
26 July, 2018
Judges
  • Siddharth
Advocates
  • Ajeet Kumar Srivastava Ramanuj Tiwari Ramanuj Tiwari