Allahabad High Court
Mula @ Sunil vs State Of U.P. on 16 December, 2022
Author: Ajit Singh
Bench: Ajit Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 59 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45065 of 2022 Applicant :- Mula @ Sunil Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Pundir Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vijit Saxena Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 126 of 2021, under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 352 and 307 I.P.C., P.S. Pisava, district-Aligarh and is in jail since 5.10.2021, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
The first information report was lodged by the informant against eight persons, including present accused, alleging therein that on 5.10.2021 at about 2:30 p.m. when the revenue team came to the fields to provide drainage for irrigating the fields, then the accused side started quarrelling over the drain. When the informant and his family member Hariom objected, then all the accused persons attacked them with lathi-danda and sharp edged weapons. It was also alleged that present accused opened fire at the injured with country made pistol, causing gunshot injury to him.
This is the second bail application of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court, vide order dated 2.8.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2114 of 2022. The new ground on which the applicant is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial, vide this application is that initially when the injured was admitted in the hospital, the doctor has not opined that the injured Vishnu has received any gun shot injury. As per doctor's opinion no pellet or bullet wound; fracture in the zygomatic bone; lacerated wound 2/3 cm was found. The doctor has not opined anywhere in the report that the injury sustained by the injured Vishnu was dangerous or fatal to life. Later on the C.T. Scan of the injured was conducted and as per C.T. Scan report a metallic density foreign body was found in left cerebellum lateral to left temporal bone and the brain surgery of the injured was performed thereafter. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that how is it possible if the injured got bullet injury in his head and he was got operated by the doctor and he was discharged only after three days of admission, while the operation of the head is a serious operation. He also submits that the applicant is the only bread earner in his family and his family is at the verge of starvation. He also submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 5.10.2021. More than fourteen months have passed and the trial has not yet been concluded. He lastly submits that if the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate during trial.
Learned counsel for the informant Sri Vijendra Saxena, as well as learned A.G.A have opposed the prayer for bail. However, learned A.G.A. has very fairly assisted the Court and has submitted that in the supplementary report the doctor has opined that no pallet or bullet wound was found and if the injured received gunshot injury, he would have not been discharged without any serious operation on 8.10.2021 when he was admitted on 5.10.2021.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, considering that the applicant is in jail since more than fourteen months and the trial has not yet been concluded, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018(3) SCC 22 and recent judgement dated 11.7.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity during the pendency of the trial.
Let the applicant Mula @ Sunil involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
1. He will continuously attend the court and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
2. He will not tamper with the witnesses.
3. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 16.12.2022/Faridul