High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:234869 Court No. - 76 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50893 of 2023
Legal Reasoning
Applicant :- Radharani Pathak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Srivastav,Rajesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J. 1. Learned A.G.A. for the State submits that instructions have been received and has no objection in case the bail application is heard on merits. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the allegations in the First Information Report it is alleged that the nominated accused persons on 17.10.2023 have assaulted the injured and as a result of the same the injured has suffered injury. General role of assault with sticks have been assigned to the accused person and the specific role of firing has been assigned to the co-accused Dinesh Pathak and Akash Pathak on the injured, Shri Niwas Sharma. Insofar as role of the applicant is concerned, the only role assigned to the applicant is that the applicant has tried to assault with Farsa on the injured Shri Niwas Sharma, however, the injury was not caused. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that no offence under Section 307 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. The injury would suggest that the injured Shri Niwas Sharma has suffered firearm injury and so far as the injury of injured, Vishal Upadhyay is concerned, they are being caused by hard and blunt object. The applicant has no criminal history. Applicant is languishing in jail since 18.10.2023 and in case she is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial. 4. Sri Saurabh Dwivedi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi, Advocate submits that the injured has suffered injury and the only role assigned to the applicant is of trying to commit assault with Farsa, however, no injury has been caused. Learned counsel for the informant further submits that the use of Farsa is indicative of the intention to commit culpable homicide. 4-A. Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute factual matrix of the case. 5. Learned AGA for the State has not brought any fact or circumstances to indicate criminal history or antecedents of the applicant which would disentitle the applicant for Bail. 6. It is not the case of the State that the applicant has not cooperated in the investigation or proceedings before the trial court. 7. The principle that Bail is a rule and Jail is an exception has been well recognised by Apex Court more specifically on the touch stone of Article 21 of the Constitution. The said principle has been reiterated by the Apex Court in Satyendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 (10) SCC 51. Learned AGA for the State has not shown any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant. 8. No material, facts or circumstances has been shown by learned AGA for the State that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses or the accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence. 9. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA for the State. 10. Learned AGA for the State has not shown any material or circumstances that the accused/applicant is not entitled to bail in larger interests of the public or State. 10-A. In the present case the only role assigned to the applicant is of trying to cause injury to the injured by Farsa, however, no injury of Farsa has been caused to both the injured. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of learned counsel for the parties 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. 12. Let the applicant-Radharani Pathak involved in Case Crime No. 546 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323 and 307 I.P.C., Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Agra be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:- i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. ii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted and/or the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she is suspected. v. 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. vi. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. vii. In the event, the applicant changes residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing. 13. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 12.12.2023 VMA Digitally signed by :- VISHWA MOHAN ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad