Allahabad High Court
Juglu And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. on 11 January, 2024
Author: Pankaj Bhatia
Bench: Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:3277 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14174 of 2023 Applicant :- Juglu And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rizwanul Haque Ansari,Santi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA and perused the record.
2. The applicants seek enlargement on bail in FIR No.183 of 2023, under Section 304, 323, 504 IPC, P.S. Khamariya, District Lakhimpur Kheri.
3. In terms of the FIR it was alleged that on 24.08.2023 when the informant was trying to catch fish from his agricultural land, the accused who were having an adjacent agricultural land started abusing and when they were refused by the informant, he was attacked and was hit by fists and lathi and danda. It was also stated that on hearing the hue and cry, the informant's son tried to save the informant and he was also harmed by the said three accused.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants argues that the date of the incident is 24.08.2023, the report was lodged by the informant on 07.09.2023 and the first medical examination of the injured person demonstrated one contused injury on the right side of the forehead and apart from the said, all injuries were pain and swelling in other parts of the body which cannot be termed as vital parts. He argues that even in terms of the statement of the son, the injured was released after treatment and subsequently, was referred for further treatment. However, during the treatment, he died on 07.09.2023. The post-mortem report on record indicates the cause of death as abraded contusion on the front of the head and a fracture on the frontal bone. In the light of the said, the submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that prima-facie intent to cause death is missing in the statement as well as in the FIR. He further argues that the injuries in the first medical examination and the post-mortem are slightly different and the death has also occurred after about 15 days of the alleged incident. He further argues that the applicants have no criminal antecedent and are in custody since 09.09.2023, as such, the applicants should be enlarged on bail.
5. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application by arguing that admittedly in terms of the FIR, the injuries were caused by the three accused persons which ultimately is the cause of death and thus, the bail application deserves to be rejected.
6. Considering the submissions, primarily the altercation occurred on account of fishing over an agricultural land, there is no motive indicated on record of causing the offence in question; applicant no.1 is aged about 60 years and both the applicants do not have any criminal antecedent, thus, on all these grounds coupled with the fact that there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicants, if enlarged on bail, can adversely affect the trial, as such, the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.
7. Let the applicants Juglu and Dinesh @ Nata be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each separately to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:
(a) The applicants shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;
(b) The applicants shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which they are accused or suspected of the commission; and
(c) The applicants 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
Order Date :- 11.1.2024 nishant