Allahabad High Court
Shani Kumar vs State Of U.P. on 19 May, 2025
Author: Siddharth
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:83972 Reserved On:-13.05.2025 Delivered On:-19.05.2025 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18665 of 2024 Applicant :- Shani Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Alind Kumar,Jai Singh,Laloo Yadav,Ravindra Yadav,Shivam Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pradeep Yadav Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Shri Laloo Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant,Shani Kumar, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 296 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 427, 436, 504, 506 of IPC and 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station- Maharajganj, District- Azamgarh, during pendency of trial.
There are allegations in the F.I.R., that on the exhortation of co-accused, Dinesh and Nirmala Devi, co-accused, Pawan, Pankaj and Pradeep caused gun short injury to the deceased. Thereafter, they caused fire arm injuries to his brother of informant both of them suffered fatal injuries and died on the spot. Number of persons collected on the spot.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was not named in the F.I.R. The main role of causing twin murders have been assigned to named accused, Pawan, Pankaj and Pradeep. The applicant has been implicated in this case on the basis of C.C.T.V., footage collected by the investigating officer. Planted recovery of country made pistol has been made from him only to falsely implicate him. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that before the trial court P.W.-1, has been examined, he has stated in his statement that the applicant alongwith co-accused, Sahil,@ Devrat, were making firing outside the shop only to create terror. They had broken the C.C.T.V. camera in his shop and put his shop on fire. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.09.2023. The trial in the aforesaid case is not likely to be concluded in near future.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for informant opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant and they have submitted that bail application of co-accused, Pradeep, has been dismissed. From the C.C.T.V., footage the applicant is found to be principal offender. In case he is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
After hearing the rival submissions, this Court finds that the applicant has not been assigned any role in causing of twin murders in dispute.
Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the paragraph no.53 of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024, (SC)LawSuit 677 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(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 as directed by the Court. 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 misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 19.5.2025 Abhishek