Allahabad High Court
Roopram Sharma @ Ramroop Sharma vs State Of U.P. on 16 July, 2022
Author: Saral Srivastava
Bench: Saral Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5278 of 2022 Applicant :- Roopram Sharma @ Ramroop Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Satendra Singh Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satendra Singh, learned counsel for first informant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant in connection with case crime no.213 of 2020, under Sections 307, 302, 504, 506, 34 I.P.C., P.S. Eka, District Firozabad with a prayer to enlarge him on bail.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with some ulterior motive. It is submitted that as per F.I.R. version, role of accused applicant is assigned for holding gun but specific role of shooting is assigned to co-accused Indresh and Ramnath. It is further submitted that role of beating the deceased by Danda is assigned to co-accused Satya Prakash. Accordingly, it is submitted that no role has been assigned to accused applicant in killing the deceased. It is further submitted that even in the statement of eye witness recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she has not stated any role of accused applicant in killing the deceased. It is also submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 03.01.2022.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage, therefore, the applicant does not deserve any indulgence. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned counsel for first informant has submitted that son and daughter of deceased namely Abhishek and Km. Archana who are eye witnesses of incident have stated in their statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that the accused applicant was involved in firing.
Be that as it may, since, the F.I.R. lodged by eye witness account wherein no role has been assigned to accused applicant in killing the deceased and further, in the statements of eye witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., no role has been assigned to accused applicant in killing the deceased.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let applicant-Roopram Sharma @ Ramroop Sharma be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(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 an 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.
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authority 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.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Order Date :- 16.7.2022 SS