Allowed¶9

Pushpendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Feb 2020BAIL/6257/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pushpendra; bail; Section 439 Cr.P.C.; Case Crime No. 0044 of 2019; Sections 302 and 34 I.P.C.; P.S. Khurja Dehat; District Bulandshahar; delayed disclosure of name; afterthought; malafide; Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement; Hirdesh; Kumari Khushboo; inquest witness list serial no. 1; in jail since 01.03.2019; personal bond and two sureties; bail conditions; Section 313 Cr.P.C. presence; Section 229-A IPC; section 174-A I.P.C.; section 82 Cr.P.C. proclamation; Samit Gopal,J.; order date 25.2.2020.

What did the court decide?

Enlargement on bail during trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions imposed in the interest of justice. ¶9

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶9

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Pushpendra, arraigned in Case Crime No. 0044 of 2019 under Sections 302 and 34 I.P.C., P.S. Khurja Dehat, District Bulandshahar, should be enlarged on bail during trial.

¶6

Court's answer

Bail application allowed: the applicant Pushpendra is to 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.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

The release on bail is subject to conditions imposed in the interest of justice, including that the applicant remain personally present before the trial court on dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., deliberate absence being liable to be treated as abuse of liberty of bail.

¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. granted to Pushpendra, in jail since 01.03.2019 in Case Crime No. 0044 of 2019 under Sections 302 and 34 I.P.C., P.S. Khurja Dehat, District Bulandshahar. The F.I.R. dated 27.02.2019 was lodged by Hirdesh against unknown persons; the informant, shown at serial no. 1 of the inquest witness list, named the applicant and co-accused Kumari Khushboo for the first time in his Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement dated 01.03.2019. Counsel contended the two-day delayed disclosure was mala fide and an afterthought and that the informant's claim to be an eye witness was untrustworthy; the learned A.G.A. opposed bail but could not dispute these arguments. Bail allowed on personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, with conditions: no tampering with prosecution evidence or harassment of victim/complainant; attendance on every date and no delay of trial; undertaking not to seek adjournment when witnesses are present; no misuse of liberty (failure to appear after proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C. invites proceedings under section 174-A I.P.C.); personal presence at opening of the case, framing of charge and Section 313 Cr.P.C. recording (deliberate absence may invite action under Section 229-A IPC); expeditious conclusion of trial; verification of sureties; bail cancellable for breach of any condition.

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6257 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Pushpendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Pratap Singh,Abhay Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Abhay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant, Pushpendra , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 0044 of 2019, under Sections 302 and 34 I.P.C., registered at P.S. Khurja Dehat, District Bulandshahar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the F.I.R has been lodged on 27.02.2019 by Hirdesh against unknown persons. He was a witness in the inquest proceedings and his name appears to be at serial no. 1 in the list of witnesses therein. Subsequently, his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 01.03.2019 in which for the first time he names the present applicant and another co-accused namely Kumari Khushboo as the accused persons. He further argues that the delayed disclosure of the name of the applicant and another coaccused person by the first informant after two days of lodging of the F.I.R is with malafide intentions and clearly an after thought. He argues that the first informant claiming himself to be an eye witness in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. is not trustworthy at all. The applicant is in jail since 01.03.2019.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the other arguments raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Let the applicant, Pushpendra, 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:-

¶10

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence

¶11

and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶12

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.

¶14

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., 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, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.

¶15

(V) 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 him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶16

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶17

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. Order Date :- 25.2.2020 AS Rathor

¶18

(Samit Gopal,J.)

Pushpendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pushpendra 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

Zakir Vs State of U.P.

Rajmangal Vs State of U.P.

Achchhe Hasan @ Najmul Hasan Vs State of U.P.

Smt Armana Vs State of U.P.

Rubi Alias Upasana Vs State of U.P.

Vipin Vs State of U.P.