High Court
Case Details
1 Reserved On:- 06.09.2022 Delivered On:- 17.09.2022 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18575 of 2022 Applicant :- Tuntun Pal Alias Krishna Kumar Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Mishra,Arti Singh,Rajiv Lochan Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar,Vimlendu Tripathi Hon'ble Siddharth, J. 1.
Legal Reasoning
Heard Shri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Vimlendu Tripathi and Shri Manoj Kumar, learned counsels for the informant and Shri Gyan Narayan Kanaujia, learned A.G.A for the State. 2. FIR was lodged against seven known and other unknown accused persons, not implicating the applicant as an accused, on the allegation of murder of the uncle of the informant, Sri Jitendra Singh. There is allegation in the FIR that the deceased, Jitendra Singh, was traveling with the informant in his car which was being driven by driver, Rahul. A truck was stopped in the way of their car and when the car stopped the accused persons broke the wind screen of the car by iron rods and after dragging the deceased uncle of informant out of the car, all the accused persons caused injuries to him by iron rod, bat and hockey and left him after beating him badly presuming him to be dead. They looted his gold chain and mobile phone of the driver. Thereafter, the informant took his uncle to the Primary Health Centre, Bankati from where he was referred to District Hospital, Basti and from Basti the doctor of District Hospital referred him to Lucknow, the deceased subsequently died. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was 2 not named in the FIR. He has been falsely implicated in this case. On 14.01.2022, the police arrested the applicant along with Virendra Bahadur Pal @ Babbu Pal and Vishal Pal and recovery of a samsung mobile phone was shown from Virendra Bahadur Pal @ Babbu Pal and recovery of sticks were allegedly shown from Vishal Pal and the applicant, Tuntun Pal @ Krishna Kumar Pal. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is resident of the same locality as the informant and he was not named in the FIR but has been subsequently implicated on account of election rivalry. He has been assigned the role of hatching criminal conspiracy but there is no evidence of agreement between two or more persons to commit the alleged act. The applicant has not been shown to have any motive to commit the alleged offence. The applicant was named by the informant in his majeed bayan recorded on 09.01.2022. He has no criminal history to his credit and is in jail since 14.01.2022. 5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A have vehemently opposed the bail application. Counsel for the informant has submitted that the investigating officer has collected the call details of the applicant and other co-accused which shows that the applicant was in touch with the co-accused persons and therefore the role of conspiracy assigned to the applicant is correct. He has submitted that recovery of danda has been shown from the applicant and hence the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. After hearing the rival contentions, this court finds that although some call details have been collected by the investigating officer which shows talking of the applicant to other co-accused and a recovery of a danda allegedly used in crime has been made on the pointing out of the applicant and named co-accused but it will not prove that the applicant had 3 meeting of mind with the co-accused persons for the purpose of committing the alleged offence. What was the content of the calls made by the applicant on the mobile phone of the other co-accused is not clear. In the bail application of co-accused, Amit, the evidence of collection of call details have been brought on record which has been pointed out by the counsel for the informant. 7. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. Let the applicant, Tuntun Pal Alias Krishna Kumar Pal, involved in Case Crime No. 4 of 2022, under Sections- 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 427, 394, 411, 302, 120-B IPC and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Lalganj, District- Basti, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) 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. 4 (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) 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. 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 Penal Code. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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 him in accordance with law. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 17.09.2022 Rohit Digitally signed by ROHIT DAS Date: 2022.09.19 10:11:48 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad