Allahabad High Court
Nahna @ Sonu vs State Of U.P. on 28 August, 2023
Author: Samit Gopal
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:172786 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37835 of 2023 Applicant :- Nahna @ Sonu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Pal Singh Jadaun,Seema Singh Jadaun Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
1. List revised.
2. Heard Sri Jitendra Pal Singh Jadaun, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the material on record.
3. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Nahna @ Sonu, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 29 of 2023, under Sections 302, 504, 506 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Vijaygarh, District Aligarh.
4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 20.03.2023 at 07:12 am by Kalicharan against the applicant, Bhoori Singh and Bhole Shankar alleging therein that his brother Ram Khilari used to live in the house of Shiv Dayal and had some love relationship with his wife Meera Devi. In the night of 19/20.03.2023 at about 01:00 am he received an information that his brother Ram Khilari is being assaulted by the family members of Shiv Dayal on which he and Satyaveer went there and saw Bhoori Singh, Bhole Shankar and Nahna the applicant assaulting his brother on which he intervened to save him and then accused persons abused him and threatened him and told him to run away. He then returned back at 05:00 am with Satyaveer to the house of Shiv Dayal and saw his brother lying dead in the hut. The FIR has thus been lodged.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the prosecution story is totally false and concocted inasmuch as the incident in the present case stated to have taken place on 20.03.2023 at about 01:00 am on which the First Information Report was lodged at 07:12 am wherein the first informant states to have seen the incident along with one Satyaveer and on threatening he went away from the said place and then returned after four hours at 05:00 am and then saw his brother to be dead. It is further argued that despite the fact that the first informant and Satyaveer are the alleged eye witnesses of the incident but there is no weapon of assault mentioned in the FIR. It is argued that even thereafter the First Information Report was lodged after about two hours, the place of occurrence and the police station is stated to be at a distance of only three kilometers. It is argued that the conduct of the first informant is highly improbable. It is argued that as per the probabilities, the case appears to be a night incident which was noticed in the morning wherein the deceased was found to be dead and then a concocted version has been disclosed in the First Information Report regarding the assault by the three accused persons including the applicant of which the first informant and one Satyaveer are being claimed to be eye witnesses. It is further argued that co-accused Bhuri Singh @ Bhura has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.08.2023 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 18411 of 2023 (Bhuri Singh @ Bhura Vs. State of U.P.), copy of the order is annexed as annexure 10 of the affidavit. He further argued that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 29 of the affidavit and is in jail since 20.03.2023.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the first informant and Satyaveer are the eye witnesses of the incident who have seen the incident and as such the prayer for bail of the applicant be rejected.
7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that although the first informant is stated to be an eye witness along with one Satyaveer but his conduct is against human nature. He states to have received an information regarding assault on his brother Ram Khilari by the accused persons after which he reached the place of occurrence with one other person and on threatening he goes back and then returns after four hours and see his brother dead. In the meantime, there is no action taken by him. Subsequently after two hours of his returning back, the First Information Report has been lodged. The present incident is a night incident.
8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence 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.
9. Let the applicant Nahna @ Sonu, 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.
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 applicant to prison.
11. The bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 28.8.2023/M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.)