Allowed

Ram Rahish @ Master v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 May 2019BAIL/19242/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the applicant, Ram Rahish @ Master, in a criminal case involving an FIR complaint with serious charges. The applicant argued that the trial was pending inordinate delay, and he had been incarcerated for over five years, warranting relief under Article 21 of the Constitution and referring to Dataram Singh.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail with two sureties on a personal bond subject to strict conditions of attendance and cooperation, and the trial court was directed to conclude the trial within six mo

Ram Rahish @ Master Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19242 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Rahish @ Master Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri A.K.Pandeyi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and also perused the record.

¶6

This is the fourth bail application. Earlier first and second bail applications were rejected by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arvind Kumar Tripathi (since retired) and third bail application has been rejected by this Court.

¶7

New ground has been taken by the learned counsel for the applicant that the trial is still pending in spite of the order of this Court dated 30.4.2918 and the applicant is in jail for more than 5 years.

¶8

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive and he has committed no offence. It is next contended that the the applicant is not named in the FIR. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant and the author of injury is also not known. Nothing incriminating material has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. There is no independent witness to support the prospectus version rather all the witnesses are interestrd and family members of the informant.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. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.1.2014.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment, and also considering the period of detention, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶11

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Ram Rahish @ Master involved in Case Crime No.895 of 2013, under Sections 307, 120-B,326, 174-A I.P.C.,Police Station Sarai Lakhansi, District Mau be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned

¶12

with the following conditions:-

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(iii) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(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.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶18

The trial court is further directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of the order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶19

Order Date :- 17.5.2019 IA

Ram Rahish @ Master v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Rahish @ Master v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aftab Alam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arsh @ Ashu Khan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Mamta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bablu @ Rakesh Verma and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tara Chandra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mamta Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another