This bail application was filed by Sumit seeking release on bail in a case involving offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 452, 323, 504, and 506 IPC. The court considered the nature of the offence, evidence, and prior bail orders for co-accusedes.
Released on bail on personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions regarding court attendance.
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. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38444 of 2019
Applicant :- Sumit Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ali Hasan
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant and the affidavit of compliance filed on behalf of the Instigating Officer in Court today are taken on record.
Heard Mr. Pankaj Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Ishtiyaq Ali, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Ali Hasan, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Lalji Maurya, learned counsel for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicantSumit with a prayer to enlarge her on bail in Case Crime No. 342 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 452, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Malpura, District-Agra, during the pendency of the trial.
The first information report has been lodged by Ibrahim against six named accused persons including the applicant that on 2nd July, 2019 at 06:00 p.m., the applicant was beating his sister in the neighbourhood of the informant. On hearing the voice of shouting, the informant went there to convince him not to do the same, due to which the applicant got angry with the informant and threatened him to face dire consequences. After 15 minutes, the applicant along with other accused persons having lathi, sticks and rods entered into the house of the informant and started using abusive language, they started beating the father of the informant,namely, Tulla and on the instigation of the coaccused Bacchu, the applicant assaulted the father of the informant Tulla by rod due to which he sustained injuries on his head. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., no specific role of causing injuries on his head has been assigned to any of the accused persons and only general role of causing injuries to him has been assigned to all the accused persons. It is next argued that in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the wife of the injuredTulla, namely, Guddi it has been stated that it was the informant's side who had come to the place of occurrence, hence it cannot be said that the applicant was aggressor. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that there was a fighting between the applicant's side in which the informant side intervened in which the
injured sustained injuries incidentally. The same is not intentional or deliberate. It is also argued that the co-accused, namely, Bacchu Singh, Lavkesh and Amit have already been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court, their bail orders have been enclosed as Annexure-9 to the affidavit accompanying the present bail application. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to her credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 4th July, 2019.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the the nature of the offence, 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 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.
(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.
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.
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.)
Order Date :- 11.11.2019 Sushil/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant should be released on bail in a case involving Sections 147, 148, and 307 IPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶11
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Sumit
State of U.P.
Manju Rani Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Manju Rani Chauhan
Parties & counsel
