High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 76 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36800 of 2022 Applicant :- Kedar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prakash Chandra Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raghvendra Prakash Connected with
Legal Reasoning
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36818 of 2022 Applicant :- Jaitil @ Lal Bihari And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prakash Chandra Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raghvendra Prakash Connected with Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45160 of 2022 Applicant :- Sonu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Yadav,Ram Krishna Mishra,Sandeep Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raghvendra Prakash Connected with Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47265 of 2022 Applicant :- Santraj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Singh Yadav,Dinesh Kumar Dhuria Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raghvendra Prakash Connected with Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35893 of 2022 Applicant :- Nirmal And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kr. Singh Paliwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raghvendra Prakash Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. Heard Shri P.C. Srivastava, learned counsel appearing in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 36800 of 2022 and 36818 of 2022, Shri Santosh Kumar Singh Paliwal, learned counsel appearing in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 35893 of 2022, Shri Hemant Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel appearing in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 47265 of 2022, Shri Sandeep Kumar Rai, learned counsel appearing in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 45160 of 2022, Shri O.P. Dwivedi, learned Additional Government Advocate and Shri Raghvendra Prakash, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first informant. By means of this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., applicants, Kedar, Jaitil alias Lal Bihari, Fauzdar, Sonu, Santraj, Nirmal and Jhinak alias Shrawan Kumar, who are involved in Case Crime No. 111 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 302, 504, 506 IPC, police station Bilariganj, district Azamgarh, seek enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. In addition to the aforesaid sections, accused-Sonu, applicant in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 45160 of 2022 and accused-Santraj, applicant in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 47265 of 2022 were also challaned under Section 325 IPC. As per prosecution case, in brief, the informant Ravindra Prasad lodged the first information report on 01.06.2022 with regard to an incident which took place on 31.5.2022 nominating therein as many as ten accused persons namely Kedar, Faujdar, Santraj, Jaitil alias Lal Bihari, Narayan, Vinod, Nirmal, Jhinak, Dilip and Sonu alleging inter alia that on account of enmity the accused persons were damaging the pillars, which were constructed in the farm of the informant and as soon as the informant and his family members came to know, they rushed to the spot where accused persons with an intention to kill, assaulted the informant and his family members by iron rod, Gaddasa, Tangi and Lathi, due to which his sister- in-law Reena Bharti, fell unconscious. Thereafter, accused persons also beaten Radhey Shyam, Rajendra Prasad and Harendra Prasad due to which they sustained grievous injuries on their head. The FIR further alleges that Manju Devi, Siddharth, Dilawar and Bal Kishun have also sustained grievous injuries. Injured Bal Kishun, Rajendra Prasad, Radhey Shyam, Harendra Prasad, Reena Bharti, Siddharth, Dilawar and Manju Devi were taken to CHC, Bilariganj from where they were referred to district hospital, Azamgarh. However, on the way to the hospital, Smt. Reena Bharti succumbed to the injuries. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of accused- Kedar, Jaitil alias Lal Bihari, Faujdar, Nirmal and Jhinak alias Shrawan Kumar argued that ten persons have been made accused in the present case attributing general role of assault against all of them. It is pointed out that in the present case eight persons have received injuries and one has lost her life on sustaining two injuries on her head. Fracture was found on Injury No. 1 only. Referring to the injury report of injured persons, much emphasis has been given by contending that all the injuries of the injured persons are simple in nature except one injury of injured Bal Kishun because fracture was found at the metacarpal of right hand, which is not on vital part of the body. It is also argued that so far as two injuries found on the body of Reena Bharti are concerned, during investigation also it has not been specified by the prosecution as to who is the author of injury No. 1 of the deceased Reena Bharti whereby she died. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of accused- Santraj and Sonu submits that it is admitted case of the prosecution that there were enmity between the parties concerned, therefore, they have falsely been implicated in this case, whereas they were not present at the spot. So far as accused Santraj is concerned, it is pointed out that he was present on his duty in Telangana. In support of his contention, learned counsel has annexed a certificate issued by the Managing Director of Vanaja Electrical Appliances Private Limited to the effect that applicant was present in the company from 05.9.2021 till 30.7.2022. So far as accused- Sonu is concerned, he has annexed the attendance registrar issued by the Lectrix ET Private Limited to show that he was present in the ofÏce on the date of alleged incident. It is also contended that there was no recovery from the accused-Sonu and Santraj. So far as recovery of lathi from the possession of Kedar, Jaitil alias Lal Bihari, Nirmal and Jhinak alias Shrawan Kumar and iron rod from the possession of Faujdar is concerned, they have falsely been shown by the police as there is no independent witness of the said recovery. Lastly, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that there is no chance of the applicants fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicants are languishing in jail and in case, they released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial. The applicants do not have any criminal history. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicants by contending that innocence of the applicants cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage, but they could not dispute the factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicants. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that general role of assault has been attributed to all the ten accused persons including the applicants. Even in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of all the eight injured persons as noted above it has not been specified as to who caused the fatal injury No. 1 to the deceased Reena Bharti. I also find that weapons of assault in the hands of respective accused person have also not been specified. There is no dispute with regard to the factual aspect of the matter that all the injured persons have received simple injuries except one injury of injured Bal Kishun, which is on non-vital parts of the body. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the applicants have made out a case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed. Let the applicants Kedar, Jaitil alias Lal Bihari, Fauzdar, Sonu, Santraj, Nirmal and Jhinak alias Shrawan Kumar, 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) That the applicants shall cooperate with the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That the applicants 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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after his release, the applicants shall not involve in any criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before release of the applicant. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. Order Date :- 9.1.2023 Ishrat Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ISHRAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad