Allahabad High Court
NITESH KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- TEJ PRATAP TIWARI
Holding
The court granted liberty to file a bail application within three weeks and stayed coercive action, thereby disposing of the appeal.
Summary
The appellant, Nitesh Kumar, filed a criminal appeal under Section 14A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, seeking to set aside the charge sheet and related orders and, more specifically, to obtain liberty to file a bail application before the trial court. The appellant did not contest the merits of the case but relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI for bail considerations. The State’s Additional Government Advocate did not oppose the request. The High Court, applying the Supreme Court’s bail jurisprudence, granted the appellant permission to file a bail application within three weeks and ordered that no coercive action be taken against him during that period. The appeal was consequently disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether an appeal under Section 14A(1) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act can be used to seek a direction for filing a bail application.
- Whether the trial court can be directed to stay any coercive action against the accused pending the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14A(1), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- bail
- SC/ST Act
- criminal appeal
- Section 14A
- coercive action
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1989 of 2026
Nitesh Kumar
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ashish Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 92
HON'BLE TEJ PRATAP TIWARI, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State of
U.P. and perused the record.
2. The instant criminal appeal under Section 14A(1) of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has
been filed by the appellant to set aside the charge sheet dated 03.06.2025
and summoning as well as cognizance order dated 14.10.2025 passed by
Additional District & Session Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Hapur as well
as entire criminal proceeding of Case No. 2667 of 2025 arising out of
Case Crime No. 314 of 2025, under Sections 352, 351(2) B.N.S. and
Section 3(2)(va) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Hapur Nagar, District
Hapur, pending in the court of Additional District & Session Special
Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Hapur.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he
does not wish to press the appeal on merits; rather, he seeks liberty to file
an appropriate application before the concerned trial court and a direction
to the learned trial court to decide the bail application of the appellant in
light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar
Antil vs. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51.
4. Learned A.G.A. for the State does not oppose the submissions made by
learned counsel for the appellant.
5. In light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding
the grant of bail to an accused, the appellant is granted liberty to file a bail
application before the concerned trial court within three weeks from
CRLA No. 1989 of 2026
2
today, along with a certified copy of this order. If such an application is
filed within the said period, the concerned trial court shall pass an order
on the same in accordance with law. For a period of three weeks, or till
the filing of the bail application, whichever is earlier, no coercive action
shall be taken against the appellant in the aforesaid case.
6. With the aforesaid observations, the present criminal appeal is
disposed of.
(Tej Pratap Tiwari,J.)
May 5, 2026
Manoj
Digitally signed by :-
MANOJ KUMAR YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…