Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23083 of 2021 Applicant :- Kashmeer Opposite Party :- State Of Uttar Pradesh Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record of the case.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 13 of 2021, under Sections 302, 504 I.P.C., Police Station- Merapur, District-Farrukhabad during the pendency of trial.
As per prosecution case in brief, informant Ravindra lodged F.I.R. on 29.01.2021 for the offence under Sections 302, 323 I.P.C. against three accused persons namely, Deshraj, Kashmeer (applicant) and Nirvesh alleging inter alia that accused persons who are resident of same village took his brother from his home and, thereafter, he was done to death by them.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that as per post mortem report, four injuries were found on the body of the deceased and cause of death of the deceased is shock and hemorrhage as result of ante mortem injury. It is next submitted that statement of informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded after three days of the incident on 02.02.2021, in which he has stated that when he reached at the place of occurrence, his brother was lying at the back seat of vehicle in question and at that time he was not dead. It is also stated that he has not seen the incident but it was told by the crowed collected there, that they were not in conscious state of mind on account of drinking too much alcohol. It is also stated that deceased was not having any enmity with other persons. On the strength of statement of the informant, it is next argued that it is admitted case of the prosecution, there is no eye witness of the incident and motive has also not assigned to the applicant. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no direct evidence against the applicant. It is lastly submitted that applicant has no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 02.02.2021. In case, applicant is enlarged on bail, he will never misuse his liberty, will not commit any offence during bail and will co-
operate in the trial.
Per contra learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but does not dispute that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no direct evidence against the applicant.
After having heard the argument of learned counsel for the parties, I find that informant is not an eye witness, the person who had given information to the informant is also not an eye witness. There is no direct evidence against the applicant and informant has not assigned any motive against the applicant. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant-Kashmeer be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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 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 applicant shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The computer generated copy of this 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.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
Order Date :- 28.7.2021 Sunil Kr. Gupta Digitally signed by Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh Date: 2021.07.28 18:19:46 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad