Allahabad High Court
Sompal@Somma And Another vs State Of U.P. on 12 June, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 ALL 1167
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13256 of 2020 Applicant :- Sompal@Somma And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Jagdish Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicants Sompal @ Somma and Lillu in connection with Case Crime No. 274-A of 2012 under Section 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 504, 506 IPC P.S. Gangoh, District Saharanpur.
Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Jagdish, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA appearing on behalf of Sate.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that it is a case of free fight between the two sides, where it is difficult at this stage to say as to which of them were the aggressors. It is pointed out that both parties have lodged cross FIRs about the same incident. The FIR lodged by the applicants against the informant of the present crime was registered first and the report against the applicants' side was registered as a cross case, lateron. A final report was submitted in the matter that arose from the cross case, which is the present case. The final report was protested and the applicants' were summoned by the Trial Court. It is argued that the accused in the FIR lodged by the applicants' side, to wit, Umesh, Lillu, Sallu, Umesh Teetu, Isham Singh and Nishan Singh have been granted bail by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Applications No.27498 of 2012, 24353 of 2013, 13262 of 2013, 24833 of 2013, 13024 of 2014,13893 of 2014, 15177 of 2014 vide orders dated 21.1.2013, 5.2.2.104, 12.2.2014, 28.3.2014, 23.4.2014, 29.4.2014 & 8.5.2014 respectively, copies of some of which are annexed as Annexure no. 8 to the affidavit filed in support of this bail application. It is urged by the learned counsel for the applicant that co-accused in the present crime, who are identically circumstanced as the applicant, that is to say, Billu, Pintu@Karmveer, Naseeba, Kala @ Jogendra, Rajpal, Padam have been granted bail vide orders dated 06.12.2019, 04.03.2020 and 10.02.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 54272 of 2019, 8440 of 2020 and 3753 of 2020, respectively. Copies of these orders are annexed as annexure no. 7 to the affidavit. It is further pointed out that the applicants do not have any criminal history and are in jail since 24.02.2020 Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, in particular, the fact that it is a case of free fight, where three men have died on the applicants' side and one on the informant's side, and it is difficult to say, at this stage, as to which party were the aggressors, the fact that in the cross case, a number of co-accused have been admitted to bail, the fact that in the present crime, co-accused, circumstanced identically, as the applicants, have been granted bail, the fact that the applicants have no criminal history, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Sompal @ Somma and Lillu involved in Case Crime No. Case Crime No. 274-A of 2012 under Section 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 504, 506 IPC P.S. Gangoh, District Saharanpur be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
v) The applicant 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. It is further clarified that the trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
Order Date :- 12.6.2020 Deepak