High Court · 2022

Counsel for Applicant :- Atipriya Gautam,Ishir Sripat,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Nitin Srivastava Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Heard Sri Ishir Sripat, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Nitin Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant ; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. There is allegation against the applicant and two co- accused in the first information report. It is alleged that on 31.01.2021 the informant along with his sons, Satyam and Sundram, his wife and other family members were present in the house and doing house hold work. The applicant and two co- accused, Kapil and Randhir, of his village came at about 12:00 pm with country made pistols and after threatening them of life, the applicant fired on his son, Satyam, who got seriously injured. When they tried to caught hold of the accused persons, co- accused, Kapil and Randhir, fired upon them also but they were not injured. Thereafter his son, Satyam, was taken to hospital where he was declared dead. There is enmity with the accused persons, as a result of which his son has been murdered by them. Learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ishir Sripat, has submitted that it is mentioned in the FIR the deceasedwas taken to Astha Hospital on 31.01.2021 and from the Police Information Report of the hospital, it is clear that the son of the informant, Satyam, was taken to the aforesaid hospital at 12:55 pm and it was informed that he has been shot by some unknown person. He has further submitted the allegation in the FIR that co-accused, Kapil and Randhir, fired on the family members of the informant but they did not got hurt is a concocted allegation. There were so many members in the family of the informant and it is not believable that no one was injured in the firing made by two co- accused. He has submitted that there is no statement of any independent witnesses recorded by the investigating officer implicating the applicant. The applicant was arrested on 24.03.2021 along with co-accused, Randhir and recovery of alleged weapon along with one used bullet shell and live cartridge have been recovered. He has submitted that it is not credible that three accused persons would cause only one fire arm injury to the deceased son when all of them were alleged armed with fire arms. He has submitted that uncle of the applicant was murdered in the year 2017 and first information report was lodged by the applicant against, Pankaj (first informant) his sons namely, Satyam (deceased in present case), Sundram, Shantanu and two unknown accused persons. Deceased, Satyam, along with one, Sameer, were charge-sheeted under Section 302 IPC and the present case has been lodged falsely to pressurize the applicant. Charge sheet has already been submitted against the applicant on 04.04.2021. Co-accused, Randhir has already been granted bail. Later he has also been exonerated by the investigating officer. Applicant has criminal history of one case under section 420, 467, 471 and 120B IPC and is in jail since 24.03.2021. Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail applicant and has submitted that the applicant is the main accused in the first information report. He has been assigned main role of firing on the deceased and the allegation is corroborated from the injuries suffered by the deceased. Learned AGA has also opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions. 2 of 4 After hearing rival contentions, this court finds that there is no reply given to the Police Information Report dated 31.01.2022 of the Astha Multi-Speciality Hospital which clearly records that the deceased, Satyam, was shot dead by some unknown person. It has not been mentioned in the report that the deceased was done to death by the applicant or two other co- accused. The statement of the witnesses recorded by the investigating officer proves that no one has seen the incident. After hearing sound of firing they went to the house of informant where they were informed by the informant that his son has been shot by the applicant and two co-accused persons, Randhir and Kapil. Number of affidavits have also been filed before the investigating officer by the villagers stating that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. On the date of incident there was kabbadi match in the village where number of villagers were present, including the applicant. The applicant has been falsely implicated by the informant. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted herein above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India 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, Sudodh, involved in Case Crime No.0078 of 2021, under Sections 452, 504, 506, 302, 307 I.P.C, Police Station Baraut, District- Baghpat 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. 3 of 4 (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. (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 misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :-01.11.2022 SS 4 of 4 SINGH NARANG Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad