Mahendra Mishra Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2020)

Mahendra Mishra Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2020)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted to applicant Mahendra Mishra in Case Crime No.237 of 2010 (S.T. No.68 of 2011) on a personal bond with two heavy sureties (one a family member), subject to conditions of attending trial, not tampering with witnesses and not indulging in illegal activities.

Issue for consideration

Whether applicant Mahendra Mishra, in custody since 16.7.2005 and facing trial in S.T. No.68 of 2011 (Case Crime No.237 of 2010) under Sections 302, 307, 427, 429, 120-B IPC, Section 3/5 Explosive Act, Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 2/3(1) Gangster Act, 1986, should be released on bail.

Court's answer

Having heard both sides and considering the nature of accusation, severity of punishment, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, the mandate of Article 21 and the dictum in Dataram Singh v. State of U.P., the Court found it a fit case for bail, without expressing any opinion on the merits.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant was directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (one a family member) each in the like amount, subject to conditions of attending and cooperating with trial proceedings, not tampering with witnesses, and not indulging in illegal activities during the bail period; breach would be a ground for cancellation of bail.

Key takeaways

Observations made in the order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed as any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.obiter¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Vivek Kumar Singh, J.) allowed Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 17906 of 2020 and directed release of applicant Mahendra Mishra on bail in Case Crime No. 237 of 2010 (S.T. No. 68 of 2011), Police Station Kotwali, District Allahabad, instituted under Sections 302, 307, 427, 429 and 120-B IPC, Section 3/5 Explosive Act, Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 2/3(1) Gangster Act, 1986. Relying on the dictum in Dataram Singh v. State of U.P., (2018) 2 SCC 22, and weighing the nature of accusation, severity of punishment, supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction on the charge, the reformative theory and the mandate of Article 21, the Court granted bail without expressing any opinion on the merits, on a personal bond with two heavy sureties (one a family member) in the like amount, subject to conditions of attending trial, non-tampering with witnesses and abstention from illegal activities, breach being a ground for cancellation. Counsel had sought parity with co-accused Vijay Kumar Mishra, who was granted bail by another Bench on 17.8.2012 in Bail Application No. 17646 of 2012; the applicant, in custody since 16.7.2005, had no criminal history. Observations were confined to the bail disposal.

Court No. - 75

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17906 of 2020

Applicant :- Mahendra Mishra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

Heard Sri Arun Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA, appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that the co-accused namely Vijay Kumar Mishra has already been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.8.2012 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.17646 of 2012, a copy of said order is annexed at pages 73 to 81 and the case of the applicant stands on identical footings. 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 16.7.2005. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.

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

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

Let applicant- Mahendra Mishra , be released on bail in Case Crime No.237 of 2010 (S.T. No.68 of 2011), under Sections- 302, 307, 427, 429, 120-B IPC and Section 3/5 Explosive Act and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 2/3 (1) Gangster Act, 1986, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Allahabad, on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (one should of a family member) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

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.

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad. The concerned Court shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad.

Order Date :- 21.9.2020 Dev/-