Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15887 of 2021 Applicant :- Prakash Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is an application for bail on behalf of the applicant Prakash in connection with Case Crime No. 452 of 2019, under Sections 323,504,506,354 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(da) SC/ST Act and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Nigohi, District Shahjahanpur.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that according to the first information report, the informant Ram Autar was assaulted with a Banka (a sharp edged weapon) but the medico legal report does not show any incised wound corresponding to or corroborating that kind of assault. The injury report relating to Ram Autar shows two injuries, one of which is a lacerated wound above the left earlobe and the other a traumatic swelling present on the left mandibular angle area of the cheek. Learned counsel for the applicant points out that the aforesaid incompatible nature of the injuries and the weapon employed, places the prosecution under serious doubt. It is next submitted that the two others assaulted, that is to say, the informant's brother Amar Pal and the informant's daughter, the prosecutrix have not sustained any injury. It is argued that there is a dispute between parties relating to a sale of land involving a sum of Rs. 20,000/- and it is on that account that the applicant has been implicated in the present crime falsely. The applicant has no criminal history as asserted in paragraph no. 25 of the affidavit and is in jail since 25.01.2020 Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the gravity of the offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, in particular, the fact that there is no incised wound corresponding to an assault by a Banka ( a sharp edged weapon), the fact that the other two persons said to be assaulted have not sustained any injury, the fact that there appears to be a dispute over some land transaction between parties and the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court, finds it to be a fit case for bail.
The bail application, accordingly, stands allowed.
Let the applicant Prakash involved in Case Crime No. 452 of 2019, under Sections 323,504,506,354 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(da) SC/ST Act and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Nigohi, District Shahjahanpur be released on bail on executing his personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(vi) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vii) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(viii) 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.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
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. It is further clarified that 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 :- 5.4.2021 Brijesh Maurya