High Court

Section 304 I.P.C., P.S. Sidhauli, District Sitapur. The first bail application of the applicant bearing Bail No.9835 of 2022 was dismissed by this court vide order dated 08.02.2024. The relevant part of order is extracted below:- "3. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that brother of the informant used to work at Anand Brick field. Owner of the brick field namely, Munna Awasthi on 01.04.02022 and also several times prior to 01.04.2022 had asked him to work on the brick field which was refused by Dilshad and due to that on 01.04.2022, he was called by Munna Awasthi on the pretext of party and he has been done to death by the accused persons by making life threatening assault.

4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent. Other co-accused persons named in the F.I.R. have been dropped and charge-sheet has only been filed against the present applicant. There is rivalry between the parties. The applicant is in jail since 05.04.2022.

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer and has submitted that there is eye witness account, its a case of hounour killing. The daughter of the applicant Seema was in love relation with the deceased and applicant saw her talking to the deceased and due to that he has brutally beaten the deceased with kicks and fists and also by brick and due to that he died. The statements of the eye witness Seem, Rajendra, Sriram, Sunil Kumar and Naresh have supported the prosecution case.

6. Perused the record.

7. In the post mortem following ante mortem injuries have been found:- "ANTE MORTEM INJURIES-1- CONTUSION 3.5 CM X 1.6 CM PRESENT ON UPPER EYELID OF RIGHT EYE. 2- ABRASION 2.4 CM X 1.2 CM PRESENT ON BACK OF RIGHT SHOULDER, 2.5 CM BELOW TIP OF RIGHT SHOULDER. 3- CONTUSION 5.4 CM X 3.4 CM PRESENT ON FRONT OF CHEST, 1.5 CM BELOW SUPRA- STERNAL NOTCH. UNDER LYING 3rd AND 4th RIBS FRACTURED B/L 4- CONTUSION 6.5 CM X 3.6 CM PRESENT ON RIGHT SIDE OF CHEST, 5.5 CM BELOW RIGHT NIPPLE. UNDER LYING 7th TO 9th RIBS FRACTURED. 5- MULTIPLE ABRASION PRESENT ON BACK OF RIGHT SIDE CHEST." The cause of death is shock and hemorrhage due to ante mortem injury. The ante motem injuries suffered by the deceased corroborates the statement of the eye witnesses. Complicity of the applicant is evident and considering the gravity of offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. The bail application is rejected.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that till date only charge has been framed and no witness has been examined as yet. He prays that trial may be expedited.

9. In view of above, trial court is directed to examine the eye witnesses within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

10. Liberty is granted to the applicant to revive the bail plea after the eye witnesses have been examined." Learned counsel for the applicant submits that two witnesses of fact have been examined. P.W.2 who is the only eye witness of the incident has not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. P.W.1 is not the eye witness as per his statement given before the court. Out of 19 only 2 witnesses have been examined till date. Trial is going on at a very slow pace. Applicant has no criminal history. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 05.04.2022. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 05.04.2022, applicant has no criminal history and out of 19 only 2 witnesses could be examined till date so also the judgment passed in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra and another : Criminal Appeal No.2787 of 2024 and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Shahid be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant 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. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 269 of BNS). (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS). Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Saurabh Yadav/-

Section 304 I.P.C., P.S. Sidhauli, District Sitapur. The first bail application of the applicant bearing Bail No.9835 of 2022 was dismissed by this court vide order dated 08.02.2024. The relevant part of order is extracted below:- "3. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that brother of the informant used to work at Anand Brick field. Owner of the brick field namely, Munna Awasthi on 01.04.02022 and also several times prior to 01.04.2022 had asked him to work on the brick field which was refused by Dilshad and due to that on 01.04.2022, he was called by Munna Awasthi on the pretext of party and he has been done to death by the accused persons by making life threatening assault.

4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent. Other co-accused persons named in the F.I.R. have been dropped and charge-sheet has only been filed against the present applicant. There is rivalry between the parties. The applicant is in jail since 05.04.2022.

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer and has submitted that there is eye witness account, its a case of hounour killing. The daughter of the applicant Seema was in love relation with the deceased and applicant saw her talking to the deceased and due to that he has brutally beaten the deceased with kicks and fists and also by brick and due to that he died. The statements of the eye witness Seem, Rajendra, Sriram, Sunil Kumar and Naresh have supported the prosecution case.

6. Perused the record.

7. In the post mortem following ante mortem injuries have been found:- "ANTE MORTEM INJURIES-1- CONTUSION 3.5 CM X 1.6 CM PRESENT ON UPPER EYELID OF RIGHT EYE. 2- ABRASION 2.4 CM X 1.2 CM PRESENT ON BACK OF RIGHT SHOULDER, 2.5 CM BELOW TIP OF RIGHT SHOULDER. 3- CONTUSION 5.4 CM X 3.4 CM PRESENT ON FRONT OF CHEST, 1.5 CM BELOW SUPRA- STERNAL NOTCH. UNDER LYING 3rd AND 4th RIBS FRACTURED B/L 4- CONTUSION 6.5 CM X 3.6 CM PRESENT ON RIGHT SIDE OF CHEST, 5.5 CM BELOW RIGHT NIPPLE. UNDER LYING 7th TO 9th RIBS FRACTURED. 5- MULTIPLE ABRASION PRESENT ON BACK OF RIGHT SIDE CHEST." The cause of death is shock and hemorrhage due to ante mortem injury. The ante motem injuries suffered by the deceased corroborates the statement of the eye witnesses. Complicity of the applicant is evident and considering the gravity of offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. The bail application is rejected.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that till date only charge has been framed and no witness has been examined as yet. He prays that trial may be expedited.

9. In view of above, trial court is directed to examine the eye witnesses within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

10. Liberty is granted to the applicant to revive the bail plea after the eye witnesses have been examined." Learned counsel for the applicant submits that two witnesses of fact have been examined. P.W.2 who is the only eye witness of the incident has not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. P.W.1 is not the eye witness as per his statement given before the court. Out of 19 only 2 witnesses have been examined till date. Trial is going on at a very slow pace. Applicant has no criminal history. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 05.04.2022. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 05.04.2022, applicant has no criminal history and out of 19 only 2 witnesses could be examined till date so also the judgment passed in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra and another : Criminal Appeal No.2787 of 2024 and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Shahid be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant 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. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 269 of BNS). (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS). Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Saurabh Yadav/-