Allahabad High Court
Ram Kripal vs State Of U.P. on 14 December, 2020
Author: Dinesh Kumar Singh
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 28 Case :- BAIL No. - 8774 of 2020 Applicant :- Ram Kripal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Neelam Verma,Atul Yadav,Sanjive Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Vinod Kumar,Vinod Kumar Gupta Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in FIR No. 232 of 2020 under Sections 147, 148, 452, 307, 323, 504, 506, 34 IPC, Police Station Kumarganj, Faizabad/Ayodhya.
3. It is alleged that the accused-applicant and other co-accused had assaulted the complainant's family and four persons who received injuries. The injury reports of the victims have been placed on record. Injuries caused to the victims are simple in nature which have been caused by hard and blunt object.
4. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that it was a kind of free fight. Both sides have received injuries and even two persons received injuries from the accused-side. She further submits that the prosecution has failed to explain the injuries caused to the accused-side. It is also submitted that prima facie offence under Section 307 IPC is not made out and other offences are not of serious nature, therefore, the accused-applicant is entitled for bail.
5. On the other hand, Mr. Shailendra Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the State and Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application and have submitted that the accused-side was the aggressor and they have severely beaten the complainant-side and as many as four persons received injuries on their vital parts and, therefore, the accused-applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
6. I have considered the submissions and also record of the bail application. There is no criminal history of the accused-applicant. The accused-applicant has been in jail since 21.08.2020. Injuries caused to the victim are simple in nature.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the accused-applicant by putting some financial fine on him.
8. Let applicant Ram Kripal be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall deposit an amount of Rs.40,000/- before the trial Court within a period of four weeks from the date of his released from jail on bail. Trial Court shall disburse the said amount in favour of the victims equally after due verification. In case the accused-applicant fails to deposit the aforesaid amount, this order shall be treated to be cancelled.
(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) The applicant 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 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.
Order Date :- 14.12.2020 prateek