Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23585 of 2021 Applicant :- Matafer Singh And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Singh,Vijay Laxmi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Apoorv Tiwari,Raj Kumar Yadav,Satya Prakash With Case:-CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23129 of 2021 Applicant:-Vishal Singh Opposite Party:-State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant:-Dharmendra Kumar Singh,Vijay Laxmi Counsel for Opposite Party:-G.A.,Satya Prakash With.
Case:-CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23380 of 2021 Applicant:-Ashok Singh Opposite Party:-State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant:-Dharmendra Kumar Singh,Vijay Laxmi Counsel for Opposite Party:-G.A.,Satya Prakash
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
1. Heard Dharmendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and Apoorv Tiwari, for the informant. Perused the record.
2 (i). The applicants in Bail Application No.23585 of 2021 have approached this Court by way of filing the present Criminal Misc. Bail Application seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.46 of 2021, under Sections 147, 149, 308, 323, 504, 506, 188, 269, 304 I.P.C. and under Section 3 Epidemic Disease Act, Police Station-Maharajganj, District-Jaunpur after rejection of their Bail Application vide order dated 2.6.2021 passed by learned Incharge District and Sessions Judge, Jaunpur.
(ii). The applicants in Bail Application Nos.23129 of 2021 and 23380 of 2021 have approached this Court seeking bail in Case Crime No.46/2021, under Sections 147, 149, 308, 336, 504, 506, 188, 269, 304 I.P.C. and 3 Pandemic Act, Police Station- Maharajganj, District-Jaunpur after rejection of their bail applications vide order dated 25.5.2021 passed by learned Incharge District and Sessions Judge, Jaunpur.
3. Informant Sabhajeet Singh lodged an F.I.R. against 10 named and unknown persons alleging that named accused along with 10-20 unknown persons on 16.4.2021 at about 8.45 having prior enmity due to land dispute having 'Lathi' and "Stick" attacked and assaulted 10 persons of informant side. Pramod and Ranjeet who received grievous injuries were referred to hospital. During treatment, injured Pramod succumbed to his injuries.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that it was a case of free fight where from the side of accused 8 persons received injuries, out of whom two persons received grievous injuries.
5. Deceased had received solitary injury, whereas injuries caused to injured persons were simple in nature. Alleged occurrence took place at the house of the applicants. No specific role was assigned to any of the accused persons. Even persons aged about 70 years were also arrayed as accused. It was a case of over implication. The applicants have no other reported criminal antecedent and are languishing in jail since 17.4.2021, there is no likelihood of early disposal of trial and the applicants undertakes that if enlarged on bail, they will never misuse their liberty and will co-operate in the trial.
6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicants and other co-accused have formed unlawful assembly and in furtherence of common object having 'Lathi" and "Stick" attacked and assaulted wherein one person has died and 10 persons were injured.
7 (A). Law on bail is well settled that 'Bail is a rule and jail is an exception'. Bail should not be granted or rejected in a mechanical manner as it concerns liberty of a person. At the time of considering an application for bail, the Court must take into account certain factors such as existence of a prima facie case against the accused, gravity of the allegations, severity of punishment, position and status of the accused, likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice and repeating the offence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses and obstructing the Courts as well as the criminal antecedents of the accused.
(B). It is also well settled that the Court while considering an application for bail must not go into deep into merits of the matter such as question of credibility and reliability of prosecution witnesses which can only be tested during the trial. Even ground of parity is one of the above mentioned aspects which are essentially required to be considered.
(C). It is also well settled that the grant or refusal of bail is entirely within the discretion of the judge hearing the matter and though that discretion is unfettered, it must be exercised judiciously and in a humane manner, compassionately and not in whimsical manner. The Court should record the reasons which have weighed with the court for the exercise of its discretionary power for an order granting or rejecting bail. Conditions for the grant of bail ought not to be so strict as to be incapable of compliance, thereby making the grant of bail illusory.
(D). The Court while granting bail in the cases involving sexual offence against a woman should not mandate bail conditions, which is/are against the mandate of "fair justice" to victim such as to make any form of compromise or marriage with the accused etc. and shall take into consideration the directions passed by Supreme Court in Aparna Bhat and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and another, 2021 SCC Online SC 230, in this regard.
8. Considering the rival submission, material available on record, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial, absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, relevant factors mentioned above, particularly that in the F.I.R. 10 persons were named and it was alleged that 10- 20 more persons were accompanying them, which indicates that prima-facie, it is a case of over implication. Deceased had died due to solitary blow. Injury caused to 10 persons from complainant sides were mainly of simple in nature. Taking note that there was a cross version also though injuries caused to 8 persons of accused side are also mainly of simple nature, it appears to be a case of free fight, where persons of both sides got injured and one person died due to solitary blow. No deadly weapon was used in the occurrence. There is no previous criminal history of the applicants. In these circumstances, the applicants have made out a case of bail.
9. Let the applicants Matafer Singh, Manoj Singh, Vikash Singh, Subhash Singh, Yogendra Singh, Markandey Singh, Vishal Singh and Ashok Singh, involved in aforesaid case crime numbers be released on bail on their furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicants will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
(ii) The applicants will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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.
(iv) The applicants will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(v) The applicants 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 applicants 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 them in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229- A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicants.
10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicants to prison.
11. The bail applications are allowed.
12. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
13. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
14. 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.
15. The observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of adjudicating the present bail applications.
Order Date:-27.7.2021 SB Digitally signed by Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery Date: 2021.07.28 17:39:29 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad