Allahabad High Court
Parshuram Pal vs State Of U.P. on 19 December, 2022
Author: Rajeev Misra
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14120 of 2022 Applicant :- Parshuram Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Tripurari Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Gupta Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Srivastava, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Mr. Tripurari Pal, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Harshit Gupta Advocate holding brief of Mr. Ashish Gupta, the learned counsel for first informant.
2. Perused the record.
3. Instant application for bail has been filed by applicant-Parshuram Pal seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 513 of 2021 under Sections 147, 323, 304 I.P.C. Police Station- Madhuban, District-Mau, during the pendency of trial.
4. Record shows that in respect of an incident, which is alleged to have occurred on 19.10.2021, a prompt F.I.R. dated 19.10.2022 was lodged by first informant Manoj Kumar Pal (father of the deceased) and was registered as Case Crime No. 513 of 2021 under Sections 34, 323, 308 I.P.C. Police Station- Madhuban, District-Mau. In the aforesaid F.I.R. five persons namely, Parshuram (applicant herein), Vishram Pal, Rohit Pal, Ramjatan Pal and Gyanti Devi have been nominated as named accused.
5. The gravamen of the allegations made in the F.I.R is to the effect that named accused with a common intention assaulted Shiv Mangal Pal, father of the first informant, and others on account of which he and three other persons namely Mamta Pal, Ajay Pal, Manoj Pal, Sanoj Pal and Mangal Pal also sustained injuries. Thereafter, injured were referred to the Hospital for medical examination. The injury reports dated 21.10.2022 of aforesaid injured are on record as Annexure-2 to the affidavit collectively. However, the injured Shiv Mangal Pal succumbed to the injuries sustained by him. Resultantly, Investigating Officer added Section 304 I.P.C.
6. Thereafter, inquest (Panchayatnama) of the body of deceased was conducted on 21.10.2021. In the opinion of witnesses of inquest (panch witnesses), nature of death of deceased was characterised as homicidal. Cause of death of the deceased was determined as ante-mortem injuries sustained by him. Subsequent to above, post mortem of the body of deceased was conducted. The Doctor, who conducted the autopsy of the body of deceased, found following ante-mortem injuries on his body:
"i. Right side blackening of eye ii. Contused swelling 11 x 12 cm right head tattooing right ear pinna and touching midline.
iii. Contused swelling 9 x 7 cm left head touching left pinna and touching mid-line.
iv. On opening scalp contusion found all around head and forehead of right side frontal partial and temporal bone and on opining skull subdural and extradural haematoma present.
7. In the opinion of Autopsy Surgeon, cause of death of deceased was comma as a result of ante-mortem injuries.
8. During course of investigation, Investigating Officer examined the first informant and other witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C., who have supported the F.I.R. On the basis of above and other material collected by Investigation Officer, he came to the conclusion that complicity of only three of the named accused i.e. Parsuram Pal, Vishram Pal and Janti Devi is established in the crime in question. Accordingly, Investigating Officer submitted the charge sheet dated 25.12.2021 whereby three of the named accused namely Parsuram Pal, Vishram Pal and Janti Devi have been charge sheeted under Section 147, 323 and 304 I.P.C. whereas two of the named accused namely Rohit Pal and Ramjatan Pal have been exculpated.
9. At the very outset, Mr. Anil Kumar Shrivastava, the learned senior counsel for applicant submits that two of the named and charge-sheeted accused namely Gyanti Devi and Vishram Pal have already been enlarged on bail by this Court. Photocopies of bail orders of aforementioned accused have been placed before this Court and same are taken on record. For ready reference, details of bail orders are reproduced herein-under:
i. Named and charge-sheeted accused Gyanti Devi has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 17.05.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9957 of 2022 (Gyanti Devi Vs. State of U.P.). ii.Named and charge-sheeted accused Vishram Pal has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 12.09.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 13961 of 2022 (Vishram Pali Vs. State of U.P.).
10. On the aforesaid premise, learned counsel for applicant contends that case of present applicant is similar and identical to that of co-accused Gyanti Devi and Vishram Pal, who have already been enlarged on bail. He also contends that there is no such distinguishing feature on the basis of which case of present applicant can be distinguished from aforesaid co-accused so as to deny bail to present applicant. Thus for the facts and reasons recorded in the bail orders of co-accused Gyanti Devi and Vishram Pal, applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. As such, applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. It is then contended that deceased has died on account of fatal head injury sustained by him. However, none of witnesses, who have been examined under Section 161 Cr.P.C. have specified as to who is the author of the fatal head injury sustained by deceased. It is thus urged that applicant is entitled to the benefit of doubt, at this stage. It is lastly contended that even otherwise applicant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 21.11.2021. As such, he has under-gone more than one year of incarceration. In case applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial. It is lastly submitted that charge-sheet has already been submitted against applicant therefore the evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant, stands crystallised. As such, custodial arrest of applicant is not absolutely necessary during the course of trial. On the cumulative strength of aforesaid, learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
11. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State and the learned counsel for first informant have opposed the present bail application. They jointly submit that since applicant is a named as well as charge-sheeted accused therefore he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. Criminality alleged against charge-sheeted accused is common. As such, it is interlinked and intertwined. Therefore same is incapable of separation and segregation. However, they could not dispute the factual and legal submissions urged by learned counsel for applicant, at this stage.
12. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon consideration of evidence on record, accusations made as well as complicity of applicant coupled with the fact that case of present applicant is similar and identical to that of co-accused, who have already been enlarged on bail, criminality alleged against all the named/charge sheeted accused is common, therefore, same is interlinked and intertwined hence incapable of separation or segregation yet co-accused have been enlarged on bail, there is no such distinguishing feature on the basis of which case of present applicant can be distinguished from aforesaid co-accused so as to deny him bail, applicant being entitled to the benefit of doubt at this stage but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail.
13. Accordingly, present application for bail is allowed.
14. Let the applicant-Parshuram Pal involved in aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) Applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence.
(ii) Applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) Applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) Applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
15. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant and send him to prison Order Date :- 19.12.2022 YK