Allahabad High Court
Sunil vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 10 January, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:2068 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12339 of 2024 Applicant :- Sunil Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vimal Kishor Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Counter affidavit was already served upon counsel for the applicant and rejoinder affidavit was filed though, the counter affidavit is filed today by counsel for the State and the same is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 215 of 2024 under sections 103(1) and 351(3) of BNS P.S.- Banthara District - Lucknow.
As per the prosecution version it is alleged by the complainant that Papu son of Makhole stated that in the night of 12.08.2024 an incident of theft was occurred in the house and the some villagers namely, Sanjay, son of Motilal, Jitendra, son of Jagannath(Nanha) and other persons threatened the informant not to lodge the first information report and also threaten to dire consequences. It is further alleged that once the father of the informant was coming back from pilgrimage in the night of 14.08.2024, the present applicant/accused murdered the father of the informant and subsequently, he came to the house of the informant and informed him that he has assassinated the father of the informant.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that there is no independent public eye witness of the incident and the story which is narrated in the first information report is prima facie seems to be improbable as it is alleged that the victim himself came to the house of the informant and had informed that he had assassinated the father of the informant. He also submits that in fact there was some enmity in between the parties and due to suspicion, the name of the present applicant is implicated in the first information report contradictory, it seems that some incident has taken place on the way and because of the anonymity in between the parties, the applicant is prosecuted. He also submits that there is no ample evidence against the applicant so as to corroborate the story as is alleged in the first information report and submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history and the motive is missing. He next added that the chargesheet has been filed against the applicant thus, there is no possibility that he would tamper the evidence or would threaten the witnesses coupled with the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 15 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 15.08.2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the first information report and specific allegation for murder is against the applicant and he is the sole accused to be involved in the offence. He submits that the applicant/accused himself has informed to the informant that he has murdered the father of the informant and further there is ample evidence against the applicant resulted into filing of the chargesheet against the applicant therefore, submission is that the applicant is not entitled for any relief.
Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that though the applicant is named in the first information report, but there is no independent public eye witness of the offence; prima facie, this Court finds that the story is improbable as no accused will come to any relative to the deceased to say that he has committed the offence and further, chargesheet has been filed and as such, there seems to be no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidence or would threaten the witnesses; the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.08.2024; the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 15 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.
Let the applicant- Sunil involved in the aforementioned 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:-
(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;
(2) 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. He 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;
(3) 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.; and (4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.
Order Date :- 10.1.2025 Mayank