Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 30 (ALL)

Kuldeep v. State of U. P.

2022-01-06

MANJU RANI CHAUHAN

body2022
JUDGMENT : Manju Rani Chauhan, J. 1. Heard Sri Ravi Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Singh Chauhan, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Kuldeep with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 223 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 342, 307, 188 IPC, Police Station-Baagwala, District-Etah, during pendency of trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that for the incident dated 30.08.2020, the F.I.R. has been lodged from both sides in which both sides have received injuries. The injury sustained by the injured Savtri Devi is on the upper part of the shoulder. He further submits that in the FIR as well as in the statement of injured, specific role of causing fire arm injury to Savtri Devi has been assigned to co-accused Hari Singh @ Jitendra Singh. He further submits that it is a cross case and who, out of the two rival groups, is the aggressor, cannot be determined at this stage. The co-accused Mahavir Singh has already been granted bail vide order dated 09.09.2021 passed in Cri. Misc. Bail Application No.31840 of 2021, copy of which order has been appended as Annexure no.3 to the bail application. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. The applicant has criminal history of one case in which he has been granted bail by the court below. The applicant is languishing in jail since 07.08.2021. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. 4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. 4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release the accused, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:- (i) 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. (ii) 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. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their 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. (iv) 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. 6. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.