The court granted bail to the applicant Pinku in a criminal case involving offences under Sections 308 and 504 IPC. The order imposed standard conditions regarding attendance, non-tampering with evidence, and prohibition of delay in disposal.
Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions regarding attendance and conduct.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8313 of 2020
Applicant :- Pinku Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Jai Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant, Pinku , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 673 of 2019, under Sections 308, 504 I.P.C., registered at P.S. Powayan, District Shahjahanpur.
It is argued that in the F.I.R lodged by the father of the injured claiming himself to be an eye witness it is mentioned that the applicant assaulted his daughter Kumari Muskan with a danda on her head as a result of which she received injuries. It is further mentioned that the first informant and his wife Smt. Suman Devi were also beaten by the applicant. Subsequently, in the statement of the first informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. it has been mentioned that the applicant through a brick hit on the head of Muskaan as a result of which she received injuries. It is again mentioned therein that the first informant and his wife were also beaten. It is argued that the version of assault has been changed by the first informant and there is no injury as reported by the first informant neither on his body nor on his wife. There is no medical examination report of the said two persons. The applicant is said to have been falsely implicated due to dispute of partition of property between them. The injury as received by the injured is as a result of co-incidence by a drop of a stone by a monkey as mentioned in paragraph 16. It is further argued that the applicant is neither a previous convict nor involved in any criminal activities. The applicant is in jail since 13.12.2019 having no criminal history.
Per contra learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail.
Let the applicant, Pinku, 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:-
i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
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 :- 26.2.2020 AS Rathor
(Samit Gopal,J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in chambers on furnishing sureties.
What conditions need to be imposed to ensure the applicant does not tamper with evidence or fail to appear in court.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Pinku
State of U.P.
Samit Gopal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
