High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55816 of 2021 Applicant :- Veer Bahadur Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhupesh Kumar Singh,Agnivesh,Jadu Nandan Yadav,Sheetendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
Legal Reasoning
After considering the facts of the present case it prima facie appears that; (a) General allegation of marpeet has been assigned to the present applicant. (b) No specific role and involvement has been attributed to the present applicant. (c) Single fatal injury was found on the person of the deceased in her medical examination as well as post-mortem report. (d) Main role of causing the assault has been attributed to the co-accused Anil. (e) Co-accused Jitendra and Rajnesh having similar role have already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 55855 of 2021 and 7324 of 2022 vide orders dated 23.03.2022 and 28.03.2022 respectively. It is a settled law that while granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of the evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, his role and involvement in the offence, his involvement in other cases and reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with. Taking into account the totality of facts and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors., v. Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh & Ors., (2002) 3 SCC 598, Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee & Anr., (2010) 14 SCC 496 and Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar & Anr., (2020) 2 SCC 118, the larger interest of the public/State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed. Let applicant, Veer Bahadur be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions: (i) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) 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 of Cr.P.C. (iv) 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 the trial court. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. (vi) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that 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 in accordance with law. The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavor and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the applicant, if there is no other legal impediment. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. Order Date :- 18.4.2022/AKT Digitally signed by ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI Date: 2022.04.21 10:31:47 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Arguments
Heard Sri Jadu Nandan Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Veer Bahadur under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 227 of 2021 for offence punishable under Sections 147, 323, 304, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station-Kamalganj, District- Farrukhabad during pendency of the trial, after rejecting the bail application of the applicant by Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad vide order dated 08.12.2021. Brief facts of the present case are that the first information report dated 09.09.2021 has been lodged by the son of the deceased Somwati against the applicant and other four real brothers of the applicant stating therein that on 08.09.2021 at about 08:00 P.M. when his mother was sitting outside of her house, applicant and other co-accused abused his mother. On the enmity of obstruction to make elicit liquor by the applicant, they committed marpeet by lathi and danda. Co-accused Anil made assault on her head by lathi. After that she became unconscious and fell down on the ground. When first informant reached at the spot, they committed marpeet with him by kicks and fists and they fled away after threatening for dire consequences. The informant dialled 112 number, police came and he took his mother to Kamalganj hospital, after referring, sent to Lohiya Hospital, Farrukhabad and then A.I.I.M.S, Safai where the condition of his mother was very critical. Before lodging of the first information report, medical examination of the injured Somwati was conducted by doctor on 08.09.2021 at 10.30 P.M. As per medical report one lacerated wound 3 cm X 2 cm X Musscle deep over right top of head was found. After the death of the injured Somwati on 11.09.2021 at 06:01 P.M. at Saifai Hospital Etawah, inquest of the body of the deceased has been conducted on 12.09.2021 at 11:20 A.M. Post-mortem of the body of the deceased was also conducted on 12.09.2021 at 01:15 P.M. As per post-mortem report one lacerated wound was found over the right top of the head. After recording the statements of the prosecution witnesses charge sheet has been submitted on 06.11.2021. The applicant was arrrested on 13.10.2021. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that except the one lacerated wound over the head of the deceased, no other external injury was found on the person of the deceased. It is further submitted that the role of causing single fatal injury has been assigned to co-accused Anil by the first informant as well as eye witnesses of the prosecution. It is further submitted that a general allegation of committing marpeet has been assigned to the applicant and other co-accused persons. No specific role and involvement has been attributed to the present applicant. It is further submitted that except the deceased no other person has received any injury in the incident. It is further submitted that co-accused Jitendra and Rajnesh having similar role have already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 55855 of 2021 and 7324 of 2022 vide orders dated 23.03.2022 and 28.03.2022 respectively. He has next argued that the applicant has no previous criminal history and if the applicant is released on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.