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

Kamal Singh vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|07 April, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10061 of 2021 Applicant :- Kamal Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwini Kumar Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amit Singh
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard Sri Ashwini Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Singh, learned counsel appearing for the informant through video conferencing and Sri O.P. Misrha, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.257 of 2020, under Sections 305, 504, 506 IPC and Section 16/17 of POCSO Act at Police Station Erich, District Jhansi.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case on false facts. The incident took place on 06.11.2020 whereas the impugned first information report has been lodged on 07.11.2020 at about 21.11 hours and no explanation has been mentioned regarding delay in lodging the first information report. The applicant is aged about 66 years as his date of birth is 08.02.1955. He further submits that from perusal of impugned first information report as well as suicide notice of the deceased, no case under Section 305 IPC is made out against the applicant. He further submits that applicant is having no criminal history and in case he will be released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 23.11.2020.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the application for bail of the applicant and submitted that the complainant and his wife have supported the prosecution story. The applicant came to the house of the informant and started abusing the deceased and also stated that why did you not marry her daughter ? Hearing this, Anjali (the deceased) entered her house and consumed poison, as a result of which, she died.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, in particular the age of the applicant, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant-Kamal Singh, who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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 IPC.
(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., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF 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 IPC.
(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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 TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:
1. The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.
2. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
3. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
4. 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 :- 7.4.2021 Ajeet
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

Kamal Singh vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
07 April, 2021
Judges
  • Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Advocates
  • Ashwini Kumar Ojha