Devendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 67

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37019 of 2020

Applicant :- Devendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey,Satish Trivedi (Senior Adv.),Sheshadri Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sharad Chandra

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Satish Trivedi, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sharad Chandra, learned counsel for the complainant and learned AGA and perused the record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no. 23 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 304 and 506 IPC, P.S. Bithauli, District- Etawah is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his application for bail submits that the applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated. Submission of Sri Satish Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate is of two folds. Firstly, a prompt FIR was registered against seven named accused persons on 10.07.2020 attributing general role assaulted by lathi, danda and kulhari upon Surendra Singh(deceased) and Naresh Singh and Kalloo @ Om Prakash got injured. The post mortem report of the deceased reveals that he has sustained solitary blow on his head. Besides this there are one contusion on lower side. There is allegation of indiscriminately wielding blow by lathi, danda and kulhari. It is not clear that who is the real author of fatal blow by way of the head injury over the deceased.

¶8

Secondly, it is canvassed by learned counsel for the applicant that this is cross case where both sides have sustained injuries. An FIR was registered as case crime no. 24 of 2020 on 10.07.2020 itself under Section 147, 148, 323 and 504 IPC, whereby one Upendra Singh also injured. There are as many as seven injuries over his person. There is no explanation coming forward as to how and under what circumstances Upendra Singh has sustained injury over his body. The applicant is in jail since 25.07.2020 and has no criminal antecedents except the present one.

¶9

I have perused the injury report of Upendra Singh, there are seven injuries over his person. There is no plausible justification coming forward that how these injuries inflicted upon Upendra Singh. There is cross version of the case and it is not clear that as to which group is aggressor over whom.

¶10

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel

¶11

for the applicant.

¶12

The submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, prima facie, quite appealing and convincing for the purpose of bail only.

¶13

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail.

¶14

Let the applicant Devendra Singh , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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.

¶16

(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶17

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶18

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶19

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL

¶20

WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶21

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.

¶22

Order Date :- 19.11.2020

¶23

Abhishek Sri.

Devendra Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devendra Singh 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Shripati Devi and Another Vs State of U.P.

Krishnpal@ Kallu Vs State of U.P.

Dharm Pal Vs State of U.P.

Smt Babita Vs State of U.P.

Prem Singh Vs State of U.P.

Smt Saraswati Singh Vs State of U.P.