Allowed

Sookar Paswan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Nov 2021BAIL/20784/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed the second bail application filed by an accused in a murder case. The applicant contended lack of prior criminal history and length of detention. The court granted bail without expressing an opinion on merits, imposing conditions against witness intimidation and trial delays.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted with conditions; trial to be concluded within six months; release on personal bond and two local sureties.

Sookar Paswan Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20784 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Sookar Paswan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

¶6

This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. His first bail application was rejected by a coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 10.10.2017.

¶7

This second bail application has been filed by the applicant in S.T. No. 359 of 2016, Case Crime No. 920 of 2016, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 302 IPC, Police Station - Narhi, District - Ballia with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶8

The FIR was lodged by complainant Rajesh Yadav against six named accused persons including this applicant. The FIR speaks of the prosecution story that all the accused persons came to the house of complainant armed with lathi-danda and stones with intention to assault and cause death. In this incident of mar-pit, the mother of the complainant died on the spot and the matter was reported to the police.

¶9

The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is then argued by the learned counsel that the deceased Duiji Devi @ Hijee sustained only one fatal injury on her skull and the accused persons were six in number. It cannot be said as to who was the author of the alleged fatal blow. It is also argued that the applicant is in jail since 28.09.2016 and the trial is not likely to conclude in near future, it is still pending and has yet not been completed. One more argument is that the applicant has no criminal history prior to this case. Lastly, it is argued that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. He will cooperate during trial, will not seek unnecessary adjournment during trial and will attend each and every date fixed in the trial.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. It is argued that specific role of causing fatal injury on the head of the deceased was assigned to this applicant and the case of the present accused is distinguishable from other co-accused who have already been granted bail.

¶11

Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering that the trial is not going to complete in near future, considering the long period of detention of the applicant in jail since 28.02.2016 and considering all other attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out subject to the condition that the applicant will not intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will not avoid the course of justice.

¶12

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed. The trial court is expected to decide and conclude the trial possibly within six months from today.

¶13

Let applicant Sookar Paswan involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶14

(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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;

¶15

(2). 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 of the Indian Penal Code;

¶16

(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court may initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(4). The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the learned counsel for the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 24.11.2021 LBY

Sookar Paswan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sookar Paswan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pooran Vs State of U.P.

Anuj Kumar Pal @ Neelu Vs State of U.P.

Moin Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kush Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Vs State of U.P.

Imran Vs State of U.P.