Allowed

Rajendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Jan 2021BAIL/34854/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad allowed criminal bail application for applicant Rajendra involved in allegedly culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Relief granted involves personal bond with sureties subject to strict trial attendance conditions and emergency provisions for court functionality. Disposition follows reliance on Article 21 and apex court dicta.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions regarding court attendance and trial proceedings.

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

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34854 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rajendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rupendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Shri Rupendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and also perused the record.

¶7

By means of the present bail application the applicant, who is facing prosecution in connection with Case Crime No.106 of 2020, u/s 323, 304 I.P.C., P.S.-Sirauli, District-Bareilly, is seeking his enlargement on bail during trial. The applicant is in jail since 19.5.2020.

¶8

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that prior to filing of the present F.I.R., an NCR was got registered on 31.3.2020 u/s 323 I.P.C. by one Raghuveer against Rajendra, Lokesh and Jashvir but after the demise of the deceased Amar singh Baghel, the FIR came into existence on the same day u/s 323, 304 I.P.C. I have perused the contents of the F.I.R. and the injury report of the deceased and it is evident that there is omnibus role attributed to all accused persons for assault upon the deceased by lathi and danda. Postmortem report of the deceased shows that there are as many as ten injuries over his person and it is not clear from the evidence collected by the police during investigation that who is the author of fatal injury. Submission is that taking into account that there is general and omnibus role attributed to all the accused persons and who is the author of fatal injury caused to the deceased is not known, the applicant may be released on bail. The applicant is having no criminal antecedents.

¶9

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

¶10

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

¶11

that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Rajendra, 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.

¶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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL

¶18

WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

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-:

¶22

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.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

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.

¶27

Order Date :- 13.1.2021 M. Kumar

Rajendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sulley Vs State of U.P.

Kishan @Jaynarayan and Another Vs State of U.P.

Rampreet Sahni Vs State of U.P.

Akshay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Asif Vs State of U.P.

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