High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51615 of 2022 Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bharat Singh Pankaj Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Kumar Pal Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Legal Reasoning
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Kumar Pal for the informant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.161 of 2022, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Dullahpur, District Ghazipur, wherein the allegation is that informant's brother was running a rented shop and had taken two rooms on rent. In the intervening night between 13/14th August, 2022 certain unknown persons have assaulted the brother of informant with sharp edged weapon, on account of which he sustained various injuries and has died. The postmortem report is on record, which contains about 18 incised and other injuries. Admittedly the applicant is not named in the FIR. Subsequently, during the course of investigation the role of one Om Prakash Yadav has surfaced and it is alleged that on account of illicit relations that he had with the girl, who was in love with the deceased that he has been done to death. A confessional statement has been recorded of Om Prakash Yadav in which he claims that applicant had held the feet of the deceased, while he was being assaulted by Om Prakash Yadav. A bloodstained Gandasa has also been recovered at the joint pointing out of the three accused including the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is a case of circumstantial evidence, in which the chain of events do not point to the hypothesis of guilt on part of the applicant and the recovery of sharp edged weapon is also disputed as there are no independent witnesses to it. The recovery otherwise is mainly at the instance of co-accused Om Prakash Yadav. It is also submitted that the applicant has no prior criminal history and his custodial interrogation is not required as the chargesheet has already been submitted and as the trial is likely to take sufficiently long and the applicant is in jail since 18.8.2022, as such the applicant be enlarged on bail and that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the conduct of trial. Learned AGA and Sri Sanjay Kumar Pal for the informant have opposed the prayer made for grant of bail on the ground that recovery of bloodstained Gandasa conclusively connects the applicant with the commissioning of offence. Be that as it may, the records reveal that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and the implication of applicant is based upon confessional statement of co-accused Om Prakash Yadav in which the role of inflicting injuries is not assigned to the applicant. The applicant is accused of holding the feet of the deceased. The recovery is also disputed. In the absence of any independent witness its credibility is an aspect to be examined at the stage of trial. Since no custodial interrogation is required as the chargesheet has already been submitted and the trial is likely to take sufficiently long; without further commenting upon the merits of the case, the applicant is held entitled to be released on bail, at this stage. Above observations made in the bail order shall, however, not be construed as expression of opinion, on the merits, at the stage of trial. Let the applicant - Sandeep Kumar involved in aforesaid case crime 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, with the following conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) 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. (iv) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) 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. (vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. Accordingly, the present bail application is allowed. Order Date :- 19.12.2022 Anil Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad