Court No. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21054 of 2021 Applicant :- Prem Singh @ Prem Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pulak Ganguly Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
The matter has been taken up through Video Conferencing.
Heard Sri Pulak Ganguly, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri J.B. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Prem Singh @ Prem Pal, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.466 of 2020, under Sections 302 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Shahi, district Bareilly.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further argued that although the applicant along with his father, mother and brother are named in the first information report as accused but general and common role has been assigned to all the accused persons of assaulting Smt. Nattho Devi, the wife of the first informant Lakhan Ram with lathi, danda, kicks, fists and farsa but the deceased as per the postmortem report has received only three injuries and the cause of death has been opined by the doctor to be due to ante-mortem injuries. It is further argued that the first informant Lakhan Ram and the father of the applicant Sri Sriram are real brothers. The motive as assigned in the first information report regarding the side of the accused persons telling the deceased to withdraw the case against them is a stale motive. It is further argued that previously a first information report was registered on 23.2.2016 as Case Crime No.0041 of 2016 under Sections 147, 380, 427, 452, 323, 504, 506, 354 I.P.C., Police Station Shahi, District Bareilly by Smt. Bhanwati, the mother of the applicant who is also an accused in the present case against Lakhan Ram who is the informant of the present case. Smt. Nattho Devi, the deceased of the present case, Shravan and Satyapal sons of Lakhan Ram and Smt. Nanhi wife of Shravan which is till date pending trial, the copy of the said first information report is annexed as annexure no.6 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application. The first information report which was lodged by Smt. Bhanwati for an incident which took place for which an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved on 4.9.2015 and as a counter-blast to the said case, the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved by the deceased Smt. Nattho Devi, copy of which is annexed as annexure no.7 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application. It is further argued that the said case which has been shown as a motive and said to be told to the deceased to withdraw it was on the basis of an application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C which is dated 17.8.2015 moved by her against Sri Sriram, Smt. Bhanwati and Sonu in which vide order dated 11.7.2017 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.5, Bareilly, the said accused persons were summoned under Section 452, 323, 324, 506 I.P.C., the said case was a petty case and an old matter which was initially agitated in the year 2015 and an order summoning the accused persons was passed on 11.7.2017. It is further argued that even in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the alleged witnesses, no specific role has been assigned to the accused persons. It is further argued that there is no recovery of any incriminating material either from the possession or pointing out of the applicant. It is further argued while placing the postmortem report, the doctor conducting it found two lacerated wounds and one contusion on the body of the deceased and two lacerated wounds had underlying bone fractured. It is further argued that the author of the said injuries is not known. It is further argued that the entire family of the applicant is in jail. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 20 of the affidavit and is in jail since 15.1.2021.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the first information report and all the accused persons are said to have assaulted the deceased and motive has been assigned therein. The prayer for bail be rejected.
After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that four accused persons are named in the first information report, the deceased though has received three injuries on her body but two injuries have underlying bone fractured, the author of the said two injuries is not known, four accused persons are alleged to have participated in the incident, there is no specification of role of the accused persons. In so far as the motive part is concerned, the case lodged by the side of the applicant for which first information report has been registered and the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. moved by the deceased which was treated as a complaint case were both pending trial.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant-Prem Singh @ Prem Pal, 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant 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 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.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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 I.P.C.
(v) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him 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 applicant.
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 applicant to prison.
The bail application is allowed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
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 :- 25.5.2021 Gaurav Digitally signed by Justice Samit Gopal Date: 2021.05.26 11:27:25 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad