The High Court allowed a bail application for two accused persons charged with death by criminal negligence under Section 304 IPC, noting their identical case posture to co-accused already released on bail and lack of criminal history.
Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each subject to conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18142 of 2018
Applicant :- Devi Prasad And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vipin Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, the F.I.R. was lodged against four accused persons, namely Amrit Lal, Devi Prasad, Bhai Lal and Vikram alleging that on 28.12.2017 they assaulted Santlal by kicks and fists, he received one head injury, resultantly died.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that co-accused namely Bhailal and Vikram have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 27.4.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15752 of 2018, since the role of the applicants is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicants are also entitled for bail. The applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. Only one injury was found on the head of deceased. It is not clear from the prosecution evidence who was the author of the injury found on the head of the deceased. There is general allegation against all accused persons. There is no independent witness against the applicants. Offences levelled against the applicants are not attracted in the present case. They are languishing in jail since 6.3.2018 (more than two months) having no criminal history and in case they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicants and admitted that applicants have no criminal history and the case of present applicant is identical to co-accused Bhailal and Vikram who has been enlarged on bail.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicants Devi Prasad and Amrit Lal involved in Case Crime No. 1258 of 2017, under Section 304 IPC, Police
Station Badlapur, District Jaunpur be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:
2.The applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3.The applicants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4.The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.
5.The applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 16.5.2018 A. Singh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to applicants charged under Section 304 IPC who share identity with co-accused already released on bail.
Devi Prasad
Amrit Lal
Aniruddha Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
