Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Brijesh Singh vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 March, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. 2nd BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44781 of 2015 Applicant :- Brijesh Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Tarun Kumar Srivastava,Imran Syed,Pradeep Kumar,Sanjay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abhay Raj Singh
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Third supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant today in Court, is taken on record.
Short counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the complainant today in Court, which is taken on record.
Heard Sri Imran Syed, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhay Raj Singh, learned counsel for the complainant, Sri Vikas Sahai, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that statements of all the prosecution witnesses have been recorded and statement of formal witness is being recorded, hence, there is no chance of tampering the evidence and he undertakes to cooperate with the trial. Moreover, second bail application of the co- accused, namely, Raghuraj Singh, who is said to have fired shot the deceased on his chest,has already been rejected by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.9.2017. So far as the applicant is concerned he is said to fired the deceased on his shoulder, which is not fatal injury. The applicant is in jail since 8.8.2013.
Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned vehemently A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant-Brijesh Singh involved in Case Crime No.284 of 2013, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 34 & 120B I.P.C. ad under Section 7 of Crl. Law Amendment Act, Police Station Meja, District Allahabad be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.one lac with two sureties (one should of his family member) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) 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.
(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 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. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same within preferably a period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if, there is no legal impediment.
The case is of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of co- accused.
Order Date :- 30.3.2018 NS
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Brijesh Singh vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 March, 2018
Judges
  • Ramesh Sinha
Advocates
  • Tarun Kumar Srivastava Imran Syed Pradeep Kumar Sanjay Singh