High Court · 2025

Heard Sri Raghuveer Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Kameshwar Singh and Sri Sujan Singh, learned counsel for the informant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Suryaketu Singh Alias Chhotu Singh, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 165 of 2023, under Sections 302, 201, 216 IPC and 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station Chiraiyakot, District- Mau, during pendency of trial. FIR was lodged by the informant, father of the deceased, stating that on 29.11.2023, his son had gone to attend the Barat. At about 01:00 a.m. he heard three sounds and thought that crackers are being burnt. Thereafter he called his son on mobile phone and realized that phone is ringing outside the boundaries of his house. He opened the gate and found his son is lying dead outside his house. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that no one was named in the FIR. Subsequently, in the statements of informant, his wife and other witnesses names the applicant and other persons were disclosed, who allegedly caused the murder of son of informant, Saurabh Singh, because of election dispute. They stated that deceased had enmity with the applicant and co-accused, Jai Narayan Singh. It has been submitted that the statement of the informant was recorded on 01.12.2023, wherein he named the applicant for the first time on third day of the incident. The statements of the mother of the deceased and other witnesses were recorded after one week of the incident wherein they implicated the applicant and his father, Jai Narayan Singh. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant has criminal history of one case under Gangsters Act, apart from the present case and he is in jail since 05.12.2023. The trial is proceeding and at the time of filing of supplementary affidavit dated 5.3.2025, part of the statement of PW-5 was recorded. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that the applicant and co- accused had motive to commit the alleged offence. Charge-sheet has already been filed against them. Trial is proceeding and the prosecution evidence is about to be completed. FSL report of the recovered arms has matched with the bullets. Learned AGA has pointed out that the applicant has criminal history of one more case under Section 352 and 506 IPC. After hearing rival contentions, this Court finds that applicant was not named in the FIR. He has subsequently been implicated on suspicion by the witnesses. FSL report of the arms is on record, but it does not discloses whether the bullets sent for matching with arms recovered were the same as recovered from the dead body of the deceased or from the place of incident. A pin pointed question was put to the learned counsel for the informant in this regard, but no reply was given to query. It is a case of circumstantial evidence. The applicant is in jail since 05.12.2023. Under the totality of facts and circumstances of this case, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) 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. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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. (v) 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 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. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 25.4.2025 Ruchi Agrahari RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Heard Sri Raghuveer Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Kameshwar Singh and Sri Sujan Singh, learned counsel for the informant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Suryaketu Singh Alias Chhotu Singh, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 165 of 2023, under Sections 302, 201, 216 IPC and 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station Chiraiyakot, District- Mau, during pendency of trial. FIR was lodged by the informant, father of the deceased, stating that on 29.11.2023, his son had gone to attend the Barat. At about 01:00 a.m. he heard three sounds and thought that crackers are being burnt. Thereafter he called his son on mobile phone and realized that phone is ringing outside the boundaries of his house. He opened the gate and found his son is lying dead outside his house. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that no one was named in the FIR. Subsequently, in the statements of informant, his wife and other witnesses names the applicant and other persons were disclosed, who allegedly caused the murder of son of informant, Saurabh Singh, because of election dispute. They stated that deceased had enmity with the applicant and co-accused, Jai Narayan Singh. It has been submitted that the statement of the informant was recorded on 01.12.2023, wherein he named the applicant for the first time on third day of the incident. The statements of the mother of the deceased and other witnesses were recorded after one week of the incident wherein they implicated the applicant and his father, Jai Narayan Singh. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant has criminal history of one case under Gangsters Act, apart from the present case and he is in jail since 05.12.2023. The trial is proceeding and at the time of filing of supplementary affidavit dated 5.3.2025, part of the statement of PW-5 was recorded. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that the applicant and co- accused had motive to commit the alleged offence. Charge-sheet has already been filed against them. Trial is proceeding and the prosecution evidence is about to be completed. FSL report of the recovered arms has matched with the bullets. Learned AGA has pointed out that the applicant has criminal history of one more case under Section 352 and 506 IPC. After hearing rival contentions, this Court finds that applicant was not named in the FIR. He has subsequently been implicated on suspicion by the witnesses. FSL report of the arms is on record, but it does not discloses whether the bullets sent for matching with arms recovered were the same as recovered from the dead body of the deceased or from the place of incident. A pin pointed question was put to the learned counsel for the informant in this regard, but no reply was given to query. It is a case of circumstantial evidence. The applicant is in jail since 05.12.2023. Under the totality of facts and circumstances of this case, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) 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. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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. (v) 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 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. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 25.4.2025 Ruchi Agrahari RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad