Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
Rinku @ Premveer Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondent no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
2. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Rinku @ Premveer Singh with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 9.7.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Bulandshahr in Bail Application No.3437 of 2024.
3. The prosecution has come forward with a case that the married victim of this case was taken by the accused appellant from her house in the night of 29.5.2024 and he took her to the house of his co-brother-in-law where rape was committed with the victim by the present accused appellant and subsequently when the victim requested him to marry with her he refused. FIR was lodged, the victim was medically examined and now the charge sheet has been committed.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not com
The court found the trial court's rejection of bail to be flawed, allowing bail based on inconsistencies in the prosecution's case.
The court found that the appellant made a sufficient case for bail, emphasizing the consensual nature of the relationship and errors in the trial court's assessment.
The court determined that the appellant's alleged actions did not constitute an offence under the SC/ST Act, allowing bail based on the consensual nature of the relationship and errors in the trial C....
The court established that bail should be granted when the evidence is insufficient to support the charges, especially in cases involving serious allegations.
The court ruled that the denial of bail was erroneous due to insufficient evidence supporting the prosecution's case, allowing the appellant to be released on bail under specific conditions.
The court determined that the essential elements of the alleged offences under the SC/ST Act were absent, warranting the grant of bail to the appellants.
The Court's decision emphasized the importance of cooperation in trial proceedings and compliance with imposed conditions for granting bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
The court's decision was primarily based on the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C and the facts and circumstances of the case, in line with the judgment passed by the ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
