✦ High Court of India · 20 Mar 2025

Raja Singh v. State of U.P.) decided along

Case Details High Court of India · 20 Mar 2025

Court

High Court of India

Decided

20 Mar 2025

Bench

Not available

Length

2,542 words

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure §173 Code of Criminal Procedure §173(2)Code of Criminal Procedure Indian Penal Code §307 Indian Penal Code

Record shows that first bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court by a detailed order dated 26.9.2023, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 36810 of 2023 (Raja Singh Vs. State of U.P.) decided along with Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 34475 of 2023 (Shyampal Vs. State of U.P). For ready reference, the order dated 26.9.2023 is extracted herein below: "Heard Mr. Mohit Singh, the learned counsel for applicant Raja Singh and Mr. Sunil Vashistha, the learned counsel for applicant Shyam Pal, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mtr. S.K.S. Parmar, Advocate holding brief of Mr. V.S. Parmar, the learned counsel informant. representing These applications for bail have been filed by applicants Raja Siingh and Shyampal sreking their enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 619 of 2022, under Sections 307, 302, 34 IPC, P.S. Maudaha, District Hamirpur during the pendency of trial. At the very outset, the learned counsel for first informant submits that bail application of co-accused Ram Babu @ Mahendra has already been rejected by this Court, vide order dated 26.5.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 23807 of 2023 (Ram Babu @ Mahendrasy State of U.P.). For ready reference, the same is reproduced herein under: "Heard Mr. Mohit Singh, the learned counsel for applicant Raja Singh and Mr. Sunil Vashistha, the learned counsel for applicant Shyam Pal, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mtr. S.K.S. Parmar, Advocate holding brief of Mr. V.S. Parmar, the learned counsel representing first informant. These applications for bail have been filed by applicants Raja Siingh and Shyampal sreking their enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 619 of 2022, under Sections 307, 302, 34 IPC, P.S. Maudaha, District Hamirpur during the pendency of trial. At the very outset, the learned counsel for first informant submits that bail application of co-accused Ram Babu @ Mahendra has already been rejected by this Court, vide order dated 26.5.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 23807 of 2023 (Ram Babu @ Mahendra Vs. State of U.P.). For ready reference, same is reproduced herein under:- " वररममान दमाणणቄኌक ्ቚककीरर जममानर ्ቚमाररनमा पत, आववेदक रमामबमाबबू उरर महवेन््ቖ ककममार ककी ओर सवे मक० अ० ससं० 619 सन 2022, अन्रररर धमारमा 302, 307, 34 भमा० दसं० वव०, रमानमा ममौदहमा, जजलमा हममीरपकर मम जममानर पर मक्ሹ करनवे हवेरक ्ቚस्रकर वकयमा रयमा हहै। आववेदक कवे ववदमान अजधव्ሹमा एवसं ववदमान अपर शमासककीय अजधव्ሹमा कको सकनमा ररमा पतमावलमी कमा पररषमीलन वकयमा। आववेदक कवे ववदमान अजधव्ሹमा नवे रकर ्ቚस्रकर वकयमा वक आववेदक कको इस ्ቚकरर मम रलर एवसं रजቌኍ ररमीकवे सवे झबूठमा रफँसमायमा रयमा हहै , उसनवे कजरर अपरमाध कमाररर नहीሻ वकयमा हहै , आववेदक कवे ववरू्ቍ ्ቚरम सबूचनमा ररपकोरर रमासंव मम हहयमी छकरपकर घरनमा ककी बकरमाई कवे कमारर जलखमायमी रयमी हहै ररमा रमावत 9 बजवे ककी घरनमा बरमायमी रयमी हहै और रमावत मम पमीछवे सवे रककर ममारनमा कहमा जमा रहमा हहै, ऐसवे मम ककोई वकसमी कको पहचमान नहीሻ सकरमा हहै, वकन्रक पबूवर रजजष कवे कमारर शक कवे आधमार पर आववेदक कको नमावमर कर वदयमा रयमा हहै, घरनमा कवे समय वकसमी कवे दमारमा न रको रमाडमी कमा नसंबर दवेखमा रयमा और न हमी चमालक कको दवेखमा रयमा हहै , घरनमा ककी ्ቚरम सबूचनमा ररपकोरर कमारकी ववलम्ब सवे जलखमायमी रयमी हहै जजसकमा ककोई स्पषमीकरर नहीሻ वदयमा रयमा हहै, ्ቚमारवमककी रमाय मषववरमा करकवे बनमावरमी आधमार पर जलखमायमी रयमी हहै, आववेदक वनदቖኘष हहै ररमा वह इस ्ቚकरर मम वद० 1-1-2023 सवे कमारमारमार मम वनरू्ቍ हहै, इसजलए आववेदक कको जममानर पर छकोड वदयमा जमाय। ववदमान अपर शमासककीय अजधव्ሹमा नवे आववेदक कवे जममानर कमा ्ቚबल ववरकोध कररवे हहए रकर ्ቚस्रकर वकयमा वक आववेदक नवे अन्य सह अवभयक्ሹरर कवे समार वमलकर ओमनमी कमार सवे मकोररसमाईवकल मम पमीछवे सवे जमानबबूझकर जकोरदमार रककर ममारकर मकोररसमाईवकल पर सवमार वमादमी ककी बहन जयदवेवमी, सकोनबू ररमा सकवमर कवे उपर कमार चढमा दमी, जजससवे वमादमी ककी बहन ककी ममृत्यक हको रयमी ररमा सकोनबू व सकवमर घमायल हको रयवे , आववेदक अवभयक्ሹ दमारमा कमाररर अपरमाध ससंजवेय एवसं रम्भमीर ्ቚकमृवर कमा हहै , इसजलए आववेदक कको जममानर पर न छकोडमा जमाय। ववदमान अपर शमासककीय अजधव्ሹमा कवे रकोሗ कवे परर्ቚवेቌኚय मम पतमावलमी पर उपलब्ध समाቌኚयोሗ कवे आधमार पर आववेदक कको जममानर पर मक्ሹ वकए जमानवे कमा ककोई औवचत्य नहीሻ हहै ररमा यह जममानर आववेदन पत वनरस्र वकए जमानवे यकोग्य हहै। रद्नकसमार वमाद कवे रकर दकोष पर वबनमा ककोई वरप्परमी वकए हहए, आववेदक कमा जममानर आववेदन पत वनरस्र वकयमा जमारमा हहै।" Upon perusal of the said order, the Court finds that the Court while rejecting the bail application of aforementioned charge sheeted co-accused has recorded a finding that deceased was put to death on account of deliberate act of Driver and fellow passengers. This Court cannot sit in appeal over the said finding recorded by this Court. In spit of the various submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicants in support of the present application for bail, this Court does not find any good ground to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, aforementioned bail applications for bail are liable to be rejected. They are, accordingly, rejected " Learned counsel for applicant submits that subsequent to the order dated 26.9.2023, co-accused Bardani has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 29.11.2024, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 40928 of 2024 (Bardani Vs. State of U.P.). For ready reference the order dated 26.9.2023 is reproduced herein under: वररममान दमाणणቄኌक ्ቚककीरर जममानर ्ቚमाररनमा पत आववेदक बरदमानमी ककी ओर सवे मकजरमा 51 सन अन्रररर धमारमा 307, 302. 34 भमा०८०वव० रमानमा ममौदहमा जजलमा हममीरपकर मम जममानर पर मक्ሹ करनवे दवेरक ्ቚस्रकर वकयमा रयमा हहै। आववेदक कवे ववदमान अजधव्ሹमा एवसं ववदमान अपर शमासककीय अजधव्ሹमा कको सकनमा ररमा पमावलमी पररशमीलन वकयमा। आववेदक कवे ववदमान अजधव्ሹमा कमा करन हहै वक आववेदक कको इस ्ቚकरर मम रलर एवसं जमी ररमीकवे सवे झबूठमा रम समायमा रयमा हहै. उसनवे कजरर अपरमाध कमाररर नहीሻ वकयमा हहै. बमादमी घरनमा कमा चककदशमी समाकमी नहीሻ हहै बणलक वकसमी वमाहन सवे घवरर दघररनमा कको बढमा बढमाकर आववेदक कको झबूठमा रसं समायमा रयमा हहै ममृरकमा ककी हत्यमा करनवे कमा ककोई हवेरकक नहीሻ हहै रमावत 9 चजवे ककी घरनमा बरमायमी रयमी हहै और रमावत मम पमीछवे सवे रक्कर ममारनमा कहमा रयमा हहै. ऐसवे मम ककोई वकसमी कको पहचमान नहीሻ सकरमा हहै वकन्रक पबूवर रसंजजश कवे कमारर शक कवे आधमार पर आववेदक कको नमावमर कर वदयमा रयमा हहै, घरनमा कवे सरय वकसमी कवे दमारमा न रको रमाቄኌमी कमानसंबर दवेखमा रयमा और न हमी चमालक कको दवेखमा रयमा हहै. घरनमा ककी ्ቚमारवमककी ववलम्ब सवे जलखमायमी रयमी हहै जजसकमा ककोई स्पषमीकरर नहीሻ वदयमा रयमा हहै। उनकमा यह भमी करन हहै वक आववेदक ्ቚश्नरल वमाहन मम बहैठमा हहआ रमा ररमा इस ्ቚकरर मम मकख्य आरकोप सह अवभयक्ሹरर रमाजमा जससंह एवसं श्यमामपमाल पर लरमायमा रयमा हहै एवसं उनककी जममानर, जममानर आववेदन पत ससं0 36810/2023 एवसं 34476/2023 मम इस न्यमायमालय कवे आदवेश वद० 26-9-2023 दमारमा वनरस्र ककी जमा चकककी हहै, आववेदक कवे ववरु्ቍ समाममान्य आरकोप लरमाए रए हह, आववेदक वनदቖኘष हहै ररमा वह इस ्ቚकरर मम 1-1-2023 सवे कमारमारमार मम वनरु्ቍ हहै, इसजलए आववेदक कको जममानर पर छकोड वदयमा जमाय। ववदमान अपर शमासककीय अजधव्ሹमा नवे आववेदक कवे ववदमान अजधव्ሹमा कवे रकोሗ कमा ्ቚबल ववरकोध कररवे हहए रकर ्ቚस्रकर वकयमा वक आववेदक दमारमा कमाररर अपरमाध ससंजवेय एवसं रम्भमीर ्ቚकमृ वर कमा हहै. इसजलए आववेदक कको जममानर पर न छकोडमा जमाय। पररणस्रवरयोሗ कमा सम्ቇ रूप सवे अवलकोकन करनवे कवे बमाद सबबूरोሗ ककी ्ቚकमृ वर और वकसमी भमी ठकोस आववेदक कवे ववदमान अजधव्ሹमा कवे रकቖኘ कवे परर्ቚवेቌኚय मम पतमावलमी पर उपलब्ध समारवमान रथ्योሗ एवसं ववरकोधमात्मक समाम्ቇमी ककी अनकपणस्रवर एवसं उपलब्ध समाम्ቇमी सवे छवेቄኌछमाቄኌ ककी ससंभमावनमा न हकोनवे कवे रथ्य कको दवेखरवे हहए मवेरमी रमाय मम आववेदक कको जममानर पर मक्ሹ करनवे कमा उपयक्ሹ आधमार हहै। अरतः वमाद कवे रकर दकोष पर वबनमा ककोई वरप्परमी वकए हहए आववेदक कको उपरको्ሹ ववररर अप ससंबसंजधर न्यमायमालय ककी सन्रकवष पर व्यव्ሹरर बसंध-पत एवसं अजधक धनरमावश कवे दको स्रमानमीय ्ቚवर्ቚस्र करनवे पर वनम्नजलजखर शलोሗ कवे समार जममानर पर छकोቄኌ वदयमा जमाय। आववेदक ववववेचनमा यमा परमीकर कवे दमौरमान अवभयकोजन समाቌኚयोሗ कवे समार छवेቄኌछमाቄኌ नहीሻ करवेरमा। आववेदक अवभयकोजन समावकयोሗ व पमीवቄኌर / वशकमायरकरमार कको ቄኌरमायवेरमा / धमकमायवेरमा नहीሻ। 3-आववेदक न्यमायमालय कवे आदवेशोሗ कमा पमालन करवेरमा, वह परमीकर कवे दमौरमान वबनमा ककोई अनमावश्यक स्ररन जलए वनयर वरजर पर न्यमायमालय मम उपणस्रर हकोरमा ररमा परमीकर मम ईममानदमारमी सवे सहयकोर करवेरमा। आववेदक जममानर पर ररहमा हकोनवे कवे बमाद जममानर ककी स्वरसंतरमा कमा दकरूपयकोर नहीሻ करवेरमा और वकसमी भमी अपरमाजधक रवरववजध मम जल्቎ नहीሻ हकोरमा न ककोई अपरमाजधक कमृ त्य करवेरमा। 4- 5-आववेदक ्ቚत्यक यमा अ्ቚत्यक रूप सवे ममामलवे कवे रथ्योሗ सवे पररवचर वकसमी भमी व्यव्ሹ यमा पकजलस अजधकमाररयोሗ कको ककोई ्ቚलकोभन यमा धमककी नहीሻ दवेरमा न हमी उनसवे ककोई वमायदमा करवेरमा, जजसकवे कमारर उन्हम न्यमायमालय मम रथ्योሗ कको उजमारर करनवे सवे ववरर रहनमा पडवे। उपरको्ሹ शरቖኘसं मम सवे वकसमी कवे उलसंघन कवे ममामलवे मम, परमीकर न्यमायमालय आववेदक ककी जममानर वनयममानकसमार र्ቌ करनवे कको स्वरसंत हहै। On the above premise, the learned counsel for applicant submits that case of present applicant is similar and identical to aforesaid co-accused, inasmsuch as applicant is also a co-passenger of the offending vehicle. He, has then invited the attention of Court to page 217 of the paper book and on basis thereof he submits that it has been stated therein that Shyam pal increased the speed of offending vehicle, as such, case of present applicant is similar and identical to co-accused Bardani. The applicant is not the driver of offending vehicle. There is no such distinguishing feature on the basis of which case of present applicant can be so distinguished from aforesaid bailed out co-accused so as to deny him bail. He, therefore, contends that in view of above and for the facts and reasons mentioned in the bail order of co-accused, applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. Even otherwise, applicant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch as he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 1.1.2023. As such, he has undergone more than one year and three months of incarceration. Police report in terms of Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted against applicant, as such, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystalized. Up to this stage no such circumstance has emerged on record, necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial. It is thus urged by the learned counsel for applicant that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that since applicant is a named as well as charge sheeted accused, therefore he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. Learned A.G.A. has pointed out various other documents on the record to contend that role of present applicant is over and above bailed out co-accused Bardani. As such, applicant does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. However, he could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant, with reference to the record at this stage. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon perusal of material brought on record, evidence, nature and gravity of offence as well as complicity of applicant, accusation made coupled with the fact that case of present applicant is similar and identical to co-accused Bardani, the leanred A.G.A. could not point out any such distinguishing feature from the record so as to deny bail to present applicant, the clean antecedents of applicant, period of incarceration undergone, the Police Report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted therefore the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant remains crystalized yet inspire of above, the learned A.G.A. could not point out any such incriminating circumstance from the record, necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial, the clean antecedents of applicant, the period of incarceration undergone, the judgement of Supreme Court in Sumit Subhaschandra Gangwal and another Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Another, 2023 Live Law (SC) 37, therefore irrespective of the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to the present repeat application for bail, but without making any comment on the merits of the case, the applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly this repeat application for bail is allowed. Let the applicant Raja Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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. (ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC. (iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT IN SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC. (iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION OF THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPLICANT IS DELIBERATE OR WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THEN IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT SUCH DEFAULT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PROCEED AGAINST THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. (v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT. However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above. Order Date :- 20.3.2025 Arshad ARSHAD MAHMOOD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Find similar cases Start drafting free

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments

More cases under Code of Criminal Procedure