Hridai Ram Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 75

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10703 of 2020

Applicant :- Hridai Ram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Harish Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 54 of 2019, under Sections 304, 308, 323, 506 IPC, Police Station Nagar, District Basti during pendency of trial.

¶7

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of suspicion. It is further submitted that deceased was criminal person and was having enmity with several person due to this, he was murdered by any of his enemy but on account of village parti bandi with the co-accused, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case with malafide and ulterior motive. He has no criminal antecedents. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that co-accused Sugreev has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 07.02.2020 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 50748 of 2019. He claims parity. 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. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.05.2019. He undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted, therefore, he may be released on bail.

¶8

Learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer but could not disputed the aforesaid fact.

¶9

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering 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, (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Let the applicant – Hridai Ram involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following

¶11

conditions:-

¶12

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶13

(2) 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. He 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;

¶14

(3) 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.; and

¶15

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

¶16

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶17

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶18

The party is permitted to file a computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of Allahabad High Court before the court concerned, who shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of Allahabad High Court and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶19

Order Date :- 22.9.2020 Arti

Hridai Ram v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hridai Ram v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahendra Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Harnam Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shyam Sundar Vs State of U.P.

Kamlesh Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Mahraj Vs State of U.P.

Harendra Vs State of U.P.