Allowed

Meharwan Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2021BAIL/17412/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to applicant facing prosecution for alleged abetment to suicide and other IPC offences. Bail granted on personal bond without sureties pending court restoration, subject to verification and strict conditions regarding trial attendance.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond without sureties immediately, with sureties to be furnished after courts restore normal functioning.

Meharwan Singh Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17412 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Meharwan Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pramit Kumar Pal,Ramesh Chandra Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Tripathi,Sangam Lal Kesharwani

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri R.C. Pal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sangam Lal, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. and also perused the record.

¶6

The applicant who is facing prosecution in Case Crime No.73 of 2019, under Sections 306, 354, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Lavedi, District-Etawah and is in jail since 12.02.2020.

¶7

Contention raised by learned counsel for the applicant is that for the incident of 07.11.2019 an F.I.R. was got registered after one month i.e. on 10.12.2019 by one Mahaveer Prasad against the applicant and three others with the allegation that the deceased was a student of M.A. and pursuing her study in K.K. Degree College, Etawa. The applicant is vagabond who used to tease the college going girl and he was insisting to perform the act of debauchery with the deceased. Not only this he was started blackmailing the deceased and the girl has consumed poison substance and committed suicide.

¶8

Sri R. C.Pal, learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of the Court to the Annexure-7 C.D.R. (Call Detail Record) of the mobile. From its perusal it is clear that both of them are in the constant touch with each other on mobile phone and, therefore, I find force in the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant that both of them were maintaining old but tender relationship with each other. It seems that some extra pressure was exerted by the parent of the deceased over her. Out of sheer frustration she has committed suicide by consuming some poison substance. It is further contended that there is no justification coming forth for lodging the F.I.R. after one month. Report of viscera is still awaited. Under these circumstances real cause of her death cannot be determined. It is further alleged that there is nothing on record to establish that any of the conduct would fall within the four corners of Section 107 I.P.C. or the applicant has ever abetted the deceased to commit suicide.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no criminal history. This fact has not been disputed by learned counsel for the complainant.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Meharwan Singh, who is involved in aforementioned case 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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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 IPC. (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 IPC.

¶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

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant

¶19

shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶20

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-:

¶21

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.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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.

¶25

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.

¶26

Order Date :- 11.1.2021 Asha

Meharwan Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meharwan Singh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Naresh Vs State of U.P.

Parmila Devi Vs State of U.P.

Yogesh @ Shashi Kant Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Smt Sarvati Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Somvati Devi Vs State of U.P.

Dilip @ Munne Vs State of U.P.