Allowed

Shiv Kailash Vishwakarma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Feb 2021BAIL/3431/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant, charged under Section 304 IPC, sought bail during trial for involvement in a fatal scuffle with his real brother. The court found the injury minor and unintentional, leading to a fatal head injury. After hearing submissions and noting the applied section, the applicant was released on bail subject to strict conditions including personal presence and filing an undertaking.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding court presence, adjournments, and consequences for misuse of bail.

Shiv Kailash Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3431 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Shiv Kailash Vishwakarma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Moti Lal Vishwakarma,Ramesh Chandra Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.167 of 2020, under Section 304 IPC, P.S. Manda, District-Prayagraj is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial. Applicant is in jail since 30.05.2020.

¶7

Contention raised by the counsel for the applicant that the deceased are real brother. On a trivial and insignificant issue there was a minor scuffle in between them and unintentionally out of fit of anger, he has given s single danda blow over the head of the deceased on 27.05.2020, to which he has made no complaint of pain but on the very next day he has made certain complaint about pain. Thereafter he was taken to nearest hospital and during treatment, he lost his life. The post mortem report reveals that there is singular contusion over his head. There is no repeated blows and the cause of death is ante mortem head injury.

¶8

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

The submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, prima facie, quite appealing and convincing for the purpose of bail only.

¶10

Taking into account the number of injury and more over both of them are real brother with the additional fact that single danda blow out of fit of irritation which unfortunately turned fatal and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Let the applicant -Shiv Kailash Vishwakarma , 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:-

¶11

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE 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.

¶12

(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶13

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶14

(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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶15

(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.

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 4.2.2021

¶18

Abhishek Sri.

Shiv Kailash Vishwakarma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kailash Vishwakarma 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

Kumari Alka Chaturvedi Vs State of U.P.

Ashok Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Vakeel Barar Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Husain @ Lala Vs State of U.P.

Kuddush and Another Vs State of U.P.