Allowed

Dheerendra @ Dheeru v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2021BAIL/10386/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed interim bail to the applicant in a case under Sections 304 and 363 IPC involving death by accident alleged to have occurred during an alleged abduction. Bail was granted with conditions including personal bond, sureties upon court restoration, and undertaking not to default court proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond without sureties (to be furnished within a month) with conditions regarding court attendance and filing of orders.

Dheerendra @ Dheeru Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10386 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Dheerendra @ Dheeru Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Khare Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar Khare, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 252 of 2019, under Sections 363, 304 I.P.C., Police Station- Kabrai, District- Mahoba is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial. The applicant is in jail since 18.11.2019.

¶7

Contention raised by learned counsel for the applicant is that the present F.I.R. was got registered by Ram Babu on 9.11.2019 against unknown person that his daughter was taken away by some unknown person. However, while going with the applicant they have met with an accident. The deceased, Pooja was pillion rider and accidentally the motorcycle ran into a pit causing serious injuries to the pillion rider, Pooja within the territorial limit of police station Kabrai. She was admitted in the hospital where she took her last breath. The postmortem report reveals that the cause of death is due to head injury. Perusal of statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of Ram Babu, Panna Lal, Chandrabhan and Balram reveals that they have unequivocally stated that on account of accident by motorcycle she has sustained injury and died. In their statements all the witnesses unequivocally stated that the applicant was also with the deceased and he is related with the deceased. Under these circumstances no mala fide intention could be attributed to him.

¶8

Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

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

¶10

Let the applicant- Dheerendra @ Dheeru , who is involved in

¶11

Case Crime No. 252 of 2019, under Sections 363, 304 I.P.C., Police Station- Kabrai, District- Mahoba, 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

(i) 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.

¶13

(ii) THE APPLICANT 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 I.P.C.

¶14

(iii) 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

(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 HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶16

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶17

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

¶18

Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶19

The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶20

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶21

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶22

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶23

Order Date :- 18.1.2021 Vikas

Dheerendra @ Dheeru v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dheerendra @ Dheeru v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akshay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Asif Vs State of U.P.

Kazim Raja @ Ali Nawab Vs State of U.P.

Gomal Alias Nagendra Vs State of U.P.

Ram Pal Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Gomti Vs State of U.P.