1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant Sri Dinesh Kumar Chaudhary and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The applicant is an accused in case crime No.20 of 2020, under Section- 304 of IPC, police station Laliya, District Balrampur.
3. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that initially the first information report was lodged under Section 307 of IPC whereby on the date of incident at about 12.30 in the night husband of the complainant was lying down in the Varanda when the applicant and the family members of the applicant along with other co-accused who are on inimical terms with the complainant, attacked the husband of the complainant with lathi, danda, Kulhari and sword on his head and face due to which he shouted and on hearing his cries other family members came there and till they reached there the accused had fled. The incident is seen in torch light by them and the complainants could recognize the accused. The deceased was admitted to the hospital on the same day i.e. 30.1.2020 and during investigation statement of the complainant was also recorded wherein he has narrated the version stated in the first information report. He has narrated the same incident but has not assigned any specific role to any of the accused. It is during treatment after nearly fifteen days that he succumbed to the same and died. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the deceased was examined on 30th January itself where he is said to have received simple injuries by hard and blunt object. The post mortem report indicates injury on the head and bone had fractured and the cause of death has been shown anti mortem injuries. It has also been stated that he died due to development of septicemia while he was recovering from the said injuries. Learned counsel for the applicant has pressed his bail application on the ground that from the medical report available on record it is clear that the injuries were simple in nature which could not led to his death and consequently offence under Section 304 is not made out. He has also submitted that co-accused Anant Ram has already been released on bail vide order dated 22.7.2021 passed in Bail Application No.6015 of 2020, who is similarly placed to the applicant.
4. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute aforesaid facts as stated by learned counsel for the applicant.
5. Considering the aforesaid rival submissions as well as the general role assigned to the applicant and the medical reports and also considering the period spent by the deceased in the hospital which is nearly fifteen days and also the fact that co-accused having similar role has already been enlarged on bail, considering the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 1.2.2020 and has spent nearly one and half years in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and, I find it a fit case for grant of bail. The application is, therefore, allowed.
6. Let the applicant,Anil Kumar @ Nanbabu, involved in in case crime No.20 of 2020, under Section- 304 of IPC, police station Laliya, District Balrampur 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 shall file an undertaking to the effect that he would 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.
(ii) 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.
(iii) 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.
(iv) 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 CrPC. 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.
7. It is provided that none of the observations made above shall be considered by the trial court and the trial shall proceed on its own merits.
Order Date :- 27.8.2021 (Alok Mathur, J.) RKM.