Allowed

Rajesh Kumar Maurya v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Nov 2019BAIL/47355/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the Court considered the plea for release of the applicant accused of causing hurt. Balancing the nature of the offence, lack of prior criminal history, and the medical reports indicating simple injuries to some victims, the Court allowed bail subject to stringent conditions regarding attendance.

What did the court decide?

Release on personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions regarding attendance and non-misuse of liberty.

Rajesh Kumar Maurya Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47355 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Maurya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shibli Naseem Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Shibli Naseem, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Santosh Pandey, learned counsel for the State and Mrs. Aradhana Singh, Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant by filing her vakalatnama in Court today, which is taken on record.

¶6

Perused the material on record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Rajesh Kumar Maurya , with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 327 of 2019, under Sections 323, 324 and 308 I.P.C., Police Station-Badlapur, District-Jaunpur , during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

The first information report has been lodged by Ashok Kumar Maurya on 2nd September, 2019 against three named accused persons including the applicant alleging therein that on 2nd September, 2019, all the accused persons were inimical to the informant and his father and mother used to live alone, today in the morning, all the accused persons catching collar had beaten the father of the informant. At 3:00 p.m. when the informant and his two brothers, namely, Tribhuwan Maurya and Himanshu Maurya went to the place of accused persons to convince them not to repeat the same, all the accused persons attacked on them by lathi, sticks and axe due to which the informant and his brothers sustained injuries.

¶9

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present due to earlier enmity between the applicant's family and informant's family regarding property, as is evident from the version of the first information report. In support of his plea, learned counsel for the applicant has referred to the document enclosed as Annexure-3 to the affidavit accompanying the present bail application, which will go to show that a civil suit is pending between the parties. It is next argued that as per the medical examination reports of the injured, the injuries

¶10

sustained by the informant and his brother Tribhuwan Maurya are simple in nature, whereas the injuries sustained by the injured Himanshu are grievous in nature. As per prosecution case, no specific role of causing injuries to the injured has been assigned to any of the accused persons, only general role of causing injuries to the injured has been assigned to all the accused persons. The applicant has no criminal history. 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 September, 2019.

¶11

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.

¶12

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:-

¶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,

¶17

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.

¶18

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.

¶19

(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 7.11.2019 Sushil/-

Rajesh Kumar Maurya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar Maurya 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ankush @ Lakshmi Chand Vs State of U.P.

Nikhil @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P.

Chand Shah Vs State of U.P.

Vinay Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Karan @ Alle Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunil Vs State of U.P.