Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 617 (UTT)

Sumit v. State of Uttarakhand

2023-11-01

ALOK KUMAR VERMA

body2023
JUDGMENT : Alok Kumar Verma, J. Present Application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail under Sections 304, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in connection with the Case Crime No.462 of 2022, registered at police station Pathri, District Haridwar. 2. As per the First Information Report dated 27.08.2022, the informant’s husband Deepak Kumar had gone to his neighbor Shobharam’s house on 22.08.2022 at around 02:30 a.m. There was a programme at Shobharam’s house. Drums were playing there. When a dispute arose between Deepak Kumar and Shobharam over some issue, Shobharam’s nephew Kala (co-accused) and his associates beat him and threw him into his house in an unconscious state. Deepak Kumar told his wife Priyanka, the informant, and his mother Smt. Prasadi Devi that Shobharam (co-accused), Kala and others had beaten him. Deepak Kumar was taken to the hospital. He was declared dead in the hospital. Post-mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased was conducted on 23.08.2022. As per the post-mortem report, the cause of death was due to ante-mortem cerebral bleed and haemorrhagic shock. Upon conclusion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed. 3. Heard Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. M.K. Chand, learned AGA for the State. 4. Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. As per the First Information Report, Kala, Shobharam and their associates had beaten Deepak Kumar, whereas, witness Gulshan stated in his statement, recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, that Deepak Kumar was under the influence of alcohol on the day of the incident. He was beaten by Kala, Sumit (present applicant) and others. Smt. Prasadi Devi stated in her statement, recorded by Investigating Officer, that Deepak Kumar only mentioned the name of Kala who had beaten him. Therefore, there are material contradictions in the alleged dying declaration. 5. Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate, further contended that as per post-mortem report, only one contusion was found on the right thigh of the deceased, therefore, in the light of the post-mortem report, the possibility of death of the deceased due to high blood pressure and trauma cannot be ruled out. 6. Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate, submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. He is in custody since 04.09.2022. 6. Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate, submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. He is in custody since 04.09.2022. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding, and, the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. 7. On the other hand, Mr. M.K. Chand, learned AGA for the State, has opposed the bail application. However, he has fairly conceded that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. 8. Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. 9. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. 10. The Bail Application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant – Sumit be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions:- i) Applicant shall attend the Trial Court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment; ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case. 12. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.