Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 1154 (ALL)

Kalley Rana @ Devendra Rana v. State of U. P.

2023-04-26

SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY

body2023
JUDGMENT : 1. This Court has passed following order on 15.3.2023: "This matter was earlier listed on 30.1.2023, 3.2.2023 and thereafter on 1.3.2023, but the matter was adjourned either on the ground that counsel for applicant did not appear or there was a request for adjournment. Today also there is a request for adjournment. List after six weeks subject to deposit of Rs.500/-to be paid by counsel for the applicant before High Court Legal Services Authority. A copy of this order be provided to applicant, who is in jail, through Superintendent of Police (Jail) concerned within 48 hours. High Court Legal Services Authority as well as District Legal Services Authority shall also take steps to appoint Amicus Curiae after taking consent of applicant so that the matter will be heard finally on the next date." 2. Today, Sri Chhotey Lal Chaudhary, Advocate appeared and submitted that he has been appointed as Amicus Curiae after taking due consent from the applicant. A photo copy of the letter of applicant as well as authorization letter in favour of Sri Chhotey Lal Chaudhary, Advocate is taken on record. 3. The applicant has approached this Court by way of filing the present Criminal Misc. Bail Application seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.171 of 2022, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station-Hastinapur, District-Meerut after rejection of his Bail Application vide order dated 8.9.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Meerut. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant only on the basis of suspicion that he was last seen with the victim. According to postmortem report, cause of death was antemortem injuries which are (four in numbers). He further submitted that evidence against the applicant is his confessional statement as well as recovery of brick and there is no evidence in regard to any motive. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that criminal history of seven cases are either in respect of Excise Act or of minor offences, wherein the applicant has already been enlarged on bail. He lastly submitted that applicant is in jail since 24.8.2022, trial is proceedings at snail's speed and there is no likelihood of early of early disposal of trial and the applicant undertakes that if enlarged on bail he will never misuse his liberty and will co-operate in the trial. 6. He lastly submitted that applicant is in jail since 24.8.2022, trial is proceedings at snail's speed and there is no likelihood of early of early disposal of trial and the applicant undertakes that if enlarged on bail he will never misuse his liberty and will co-operate in the trial. 6. Sri Rishi Chaddha, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and submitted that nature of antemortem injuries indicate that it was a brutal murder. However, he has not dispute that evidence against the applicant is of last seen, applicant's confessional statement and recovery of a brick. 7.LAW ON BAIL -A SUMMARY (A) The basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail. (B) Power to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., is of wide amplitude but not an unfettered discretion, which calls for exercise in a judicious manner and not as a matter of course or in whimsical manner. (C) While passing an order on an application for grant of bail, there is not need to record elaborate details to give an impression that the case is one that would result in a conviction or, by contrast, in an acquittal. However, a Court cannot completely divorce its decision from material aspects of the case such as allegations made against accused; nature and gravity of accusation; having common object or intention; severity of punishment if allegations are proved beyond reasonable doubt and would result in a conviction; reasonable apprehension of witnesses being influenced by accused; tampering of evidence; character, behaviour, means, position and standing of accused; likelihood of offence being repeated; the frivolity in the case of prosecution; criminal antecedents of accused and a prima facie satisfaction of Court in support of charge against accused. The Court may also take note of participation or part of an unlawful assembly as well as that circumstantial evidence not being a ground to grant bail, if the evidence/ material collected establishes prima facie a complete chain of events. Parity may not be an only ground but remains a relevant factor for consideration of application for bail. (D) Over crowding of jail and gross delay in disposal of cases when undertrials are forced to remain in jail (not due to their fault) may give rise to possible situations that may justify invocation of Article 21 of Constitution, may also be considered along with other factors. (D) Over crowding of jail and gross delay in disposal of cases when undertrials are forced to remain in jail (not due to their fault) may give rise to possible situations that may justify invocation of Article 21 of Constitution, may also be considered along with other factors. (See, State Of Rajasthan, Jaipur vs. Balchand @ Baliay ( AIR 1977 SC 2447 : 1978 SCR (1) 535; Gurcharan Singh vs. State (Delhi Administration), (1978) 1 SCC 118 ); State of U.P. vs. Amarmani Tripathi, (2005) 8 SCC 21 ; Prasanta Kumar Sarkar vs. Ashis Chatterjee and Anr (2010)14 SCC 496 ; Mahipal vs. Rajesh Kumar, (2020) 2 SCC 118 ; Ishwarji Mali vs. State of Gujarat and another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 55; Manno Lal Jaiswal vs. The State of U.P. and others, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 89; Ashim vs. National Investigation Agency (2022) 1 SCC 695 ; Ms. Y vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr :2022 SCC OnLine SC 458; Manoj Kumar Khokhar vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr. (2022)3 SCC 501 ; and, Deepak Yadav vs. State of U.P. and Anr. (2022)8 SCC 559 ) 8. In the present case, there is no doubt that deceased has died due to multiple injuries, however, so far as the applicant is concerned only evidence against him is of last seen and his confessional statement which appears to be a very weak piece of evidence and the recovery of brick is not supported by any independent witness as well as there is no evidence in regard to any motive for the applicant to commit crime. Criminal history of seven cases has already been explained as referred above, the applicant is in jail since 24.8.2022, therefore, a case of bail is made out. 9. Amicus Curiae shall be paid the remuneration as fixed by the High Court Legal Services Committee, High Court, Allahabad expeditiously, preferably within a period of two weeks from today. 10. Let the applicant-Kalley Rana @ Devendra Rana, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. (iii) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C. (iv) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months after release of the applicant, if there is no other legal impediment. (v) Applicant has to appear on each and every date before learned Trial Court and any application for exemption of his appearance on vague ground could be a ground for cancellation of bail by learned Trial Court without even issuing notice. 11. 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 and send the applicant to prison. 12. The bail application is allowed. 13. It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of adjudicating the present bail application.