Allowed

Surendra Ahirwar Alias Siddharth Ahirwar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC29 Jan 2021BAIL/27650/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 306 IPC regarding an alleged tender relationship and suicide, the High Court allowed bail after noting the absence of evidence on abetment and invoking Article 21. The applicant was released on personal bond with multiple strict conditions to ensure appearance and speedy disposal of the trial.

What did the court decide?

Applicant enlarged on bail on personal bond of two sureties each in like amount, subject to strict conditions; later enlarged without sureties till normal court functioning restored.

Surendra Ahirwar Alias Siddharth Ahirwar Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27650 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Surendra Ahirwar Alias Siddharth Ahirwar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pt. S.P. Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Pt. S.P. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. Perused the record.

¶6

By means of the present bail application the applicant, who is facing prosecution in connection with Case Crime No.66 of 2020, u/s 306 I.P.C., P.S.-Ajnar, District-Mahoba, is seeking his enlargement on bail during trial. The applicant is in jail since 10.6.2020.

¶7

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is sole named accused and as per the version of the F.I.R. he and the deceased was having a tender relationship and dense love affair. On the fateful day, the applicant called her beloved whereupon heated altercation took place between them and thereafter she has committed suicide. When the couple were in affair and there is nothing on record as what transpires in their heated altercation between them, which would fall within the ambit of Section 107 I.P.C. It is just possible that it might be the case of "aborted love affair" between them. In absence of any material on record the Court is at loss to presume anything against the applicant that would fall within the definition of 'abetment'. The applicant is in jail since 10.6.2020 having no criminal antecedents.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but unable to point out any action on the part of applicant which could be said as 'abetment'.

¶9

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.

¶10

Let the applicant Surendra Ahirwar Alias Siddharth Ahirwar,

¶11

who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 IPC.

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

¶19

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-:

¶20

1. 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.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

4. 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.

¶24

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.

¶25

Order Date :- 29.1.2021 M. Kumar

Surendra Ahirwar Alias Siddharth Ahirwar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Ahirwar Alias Siddharth Ahirwar 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

Ishaq Ali Vs State of U.P.

Hari Kishan @ Hari Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Ikrar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sahil Bharti @ Raj Vs State of U.P.