Allahabad High Court
Pradyumn Alias Pradumn Alias Deepak ... vs State Of U.P. on 6 October, 2020
Author: Rahul Chaturvedi
Bench: Rahul Chaturvedi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6294 of 2020 Applicant :- Pradyumn Alias Pradumn Alias Deepak Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajnish Shukla,Sanjay Kumar Singh,Saroj Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chandra Shekhar Kushwaha,Sanjay Kumar Dubey Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Chandra Shekhar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no. 203 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 302, 307 and 34 IPC, P.S. Barhaj, District Deoria is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his application for bail submits that the applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated. It is submitted that injured Mannu Lal Jaiswal has lodged the present FIR on 25.08.2019 at 07.42 hours under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504,506, 304 and 34 IPC. During investigation the case was converted under Sections 304 and against six named accused persons and five unknown persons and applicant is named in the FIR as an accused but his name has figured up during investigation. In this transaction one person Sumit Jaiswal has lost his life and two other persons namely, Sachin and Mannu have sustained injuries. Submission made by the counsel that the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. which was recorded after inordinate delay of more than 20 days, the name of the applicant has figured up in the statement of injured person who assigned the weapon and the role to the accused. But facts remains that injured as sustained two injuries over his person, one on the head and other one on the knee and according to the doctor cause of death is injury on the vital part i.e. head of the deceased. Out of these two injured person one person Sachin Jaiswal has sustained injury by blunt object. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded after inordinate delay of more than 20 days and under this circumstances tutoring cannot be ruled out, attributing the role and weapons assigned are lathi, danda and wicket. The weapon as wicket in the hand of the applicant and it is difficult to decipher at this stage that the applicant has cause fatal injury over the person.. The applicant is in jail since 26.08.2019 and has no criminal antecedents except the present one.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
The submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, prima facie, quite appealing and convincing for the purpose of bail only.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Pradyumn Alias Pradumn Alias Deepak Gupta, 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 SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE 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.
(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 6.10.2020 Abhishek Sri.