Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Pappu And Another vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|25 July, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28478 of 2019 Applicant :- Pappu And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Pawan Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Om Prakash Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicants- Pappu and Deepu with a prayer to enlarge them on bail in Case Crime No. 132 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 427, 336, 307, 353, 332, 333 I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station-Paniyara, District-Maharajganj, during the pendency of the trial.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that as per the allegations made in the first information report, on 1st June, 2019 the first informant, who is head constable in U.P. Police, along with driver were going to village Ratanpurva Tola Lokiyabaan by Police vehicle, a tractor was coming from opposite side. When the informant pointed the tractor driver to take side, as the tractor was fully loaded, then he did not stop and stumbled across the side of our government vehicle, due to which the side of the said vehicle damaged. When the informant enquired from the driver, the owner of the tractor came along with six other named accused and 4-5 unknown persons, who were armed with sticks, lathi, hockey and sharp edged weapons and started abusing them when they objected, they attacked on them and the co-accused Pappu Nishad (applicant no.1) tried to hit constable Devendra Yadav on his head by lathi but for saving himself, he put his hand due to which he sustained injuries on his right palm and all the accused persons had beaten them by lathi and stones. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the first information report has been lodged against as many as 8 named accused persons and 4-5 unknown persons. Though the specific role of causing injuries to the injured has been assigned to applicant no.1 Pappu Nishad, but as per the medical examination report, the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature and not on the vital part of his body. General role of beating the Police personnels including the informant has been assigned to all the accused persons including applicant no.2 Deepu. In the said incident three Police Personnels are said to be injured, but as per the medical examination report, injuries sustained by them are simple in nature. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that when the Police personnels were demanding illegal gratification from the co- accused Ram Bhajan, villagers came there and there was quarrel between the Police Personnels and villagers in which the injured have sustained injuries. The applicants have done nothing which may warrant their permanent detention in jail. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the co-accused Smt. Kanti Devi has already been enlarged on bail by this Bench vide order dated 9th July, 2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 26100 of 2019. The applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicants have no criminal antecedents to their credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicants of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicants are enlarged on bail, the applicants shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant are in jail since 2nd June, 2019.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicants by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicants are released on bail they will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicants.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the material on record as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, let the applicants involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their 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 their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicants 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 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.
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 25.7.2019 Sushil/-
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

Pappu And Another vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
25 July, 2019
Judges
  • S Manju Rani Chauhan
Advocates
  • Pawan Kumar