High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42472 of 2022 Applicant :- Yogendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J. Heard Sri Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Avanish Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record. The instant application for bail has been moved on behalf of the applicant, Yogendra with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in F.I.R./ Case Crime No.819 of 2020, under Section 304 I.P.C., Police Station Gunnaur, District Sambhal, during pendency of the trial. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted
Legal Reasoning
that the first information report is based on false and fabricated facts. The accused/ applicant is innocent who has been falsely implicated in this case. He has also submitted that a first information report came to be lodged against sole named accused/ applicant. According to prosecution story, on 22.09.2020 when Prem Singh, husband of Bhuri/ first informant, was doing some agricultural work at his field, some scufÒe took place between Prem Singh, the deceased and the present applicant, Yogendra because of the reason that the present applicant was annoyed due to the reason that the deceased used to pledge his household articles to some other persons. His further submission is that the present applicant has not been assigned any specific role in this alleged incident and he is not said to be armed with any specific weapon also, therefore, no intention or knowledge to kill the deceased can be attributed to the present applicant. He has also submitted that the cause of death of the Prem Singh/ deceased, according to postmortem report annexed as Annexure No.3, is reported to be shock and coma due to antemortem injuries which are various contusions and lacerations. He has also submitted that there is no eye-witness of this alleged incident. When the first informant, Bhuri was examined in trial Court as P.W.1, she has not supported the prosecution case and, therefore, has been declared hostile. She has stated that she did not see the present applicant causing injuries to her husband. Learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that the accused/ applicant is languishing in jail since 04.12.2020 who has no previous criminal history. His further submission is that in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will also fully cooperate with the trial court in getting the trial concluded expeditiously. He has also submitted that the applicant will not intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has
Legal Reasoning
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail by submitting that the present applicant was named in the first information report. The present applicant is stated to have assaulted the deceased, Prem Singh by causing various injuries to him by which the deceased ultimately succumbed to his injuries. Therefore, the present applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, he has been unable to dispute the other factual submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record, it transpires that a first information report came to be lodged against sole named accused/ applicant. According to prosecution story, on 22.09.2020 when Prem Singh, husband of Bhuri/ first informant, was doing some agricultural work at his field, some scufÒe took place between Prem Singh, the deceased and the present applicant, Yogendra because of the reason that the present applicant was annoyed due to the reason that the deceased used to pledge his household articles to some other persons. It also appears that there is no eye- witness of this alleged incident. The present applicant has not been assigned any specific role in the aforesaid alleged incident and he is not said to be armed with any specific weapon also, therefore, no intention or knowledge to kill the deceased can be attributed to the present applicant. When the first informant, Bhuri was examined in trial Court as P.W.1, she has not supported the prosecution case and, therefore, has been declared hostile. She has stated that she did not see the present applicant causing injuries to her husband. Thus, having regard to overall facts and circumstances of this case and also keeping in view the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties, the nature of offence, evidence regarding the complicity of applicant and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, a case for bail is made out. The bail application is, thus, allowed. Let the applicant- Yogendra be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- 1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial; 2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment; 3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail; 4. 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police ofÏcer; 5. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence, in case the witnesses are present in court; 6. 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, default of this condition is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his 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. The learned trial court is directed to proceed with the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same with utmost expedition, in accordance with law, without granting any unnecessary adjournments to the parties, if there is no other legal impediment. It is made clear that the trial of the aforesaid case shall be conducted without being influenced by any observation made herein above which are confined to the disposal of the instant application for bail. (Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J.) Order Date :- 2.2.2023 SP/- Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad