Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Chhannu @ Chhanne Lal [Second ... vs State Of U.P.

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|19 February, 2021

JUDGMENT / ORDER

This is a second bail application which has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 38 of 2018, S.T. No. 67 of 2018, under Sections 304, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kurshi, District Barabanki with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. The co-accused persons namely Sushila Devi & Prem Chandra @ Prem Yadav have already been granted bail by the Coordinate Benches of this Court vide order dated 27.04.2018 & 01.11.2018 passed in Bail Nos. 3156 of 2018 & Bail No. 5444 of 2018 respectively, as such, the accused applicant should also be enlarged on bail. The first Bail Application No. 10517 of 2018 of the accused applicant was rejected by the coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 10.12.2018 observing that prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined, as such, the accused-applicant can not be enlarged on bail at this stage. Now, all the witnesses of fact have been examined in the Court and there is no possibility of tempering with the evidence of the case, so the accused-applicant should be enlarged on bail. The applicant is in jail since 25.01.2018.
Contrary to it, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the bail application of the accused applicant and argued that the accused-applicant was armed with Banka (a sharp edged weapon). In the post mortem report, injury of Banka (a sharp edged weapon) was found, as such, he should not be enlarged on bail.
Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record and also the statements of witnesses of fact recorded before the Court.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, without commenting on merits, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant Chhannu @ Chhanne Lal involved in Case Crime No. Case Crime No. 38 of 2018, S.T. No. 67 of 2018, under Sections 304, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kurshi, District Barabanki 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;
(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.
(v)The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 19.2.2021 Arun
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

Chhannu @ Chhanne Lal [Second ... vs State Of U.P.

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
19 February, 2021
Judges
  • Saroj Yadav