Allowed

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

Allahabad HC12 Jan 2021BAIL/38877/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application filed in connection with affray charges where two groups fought and injuries occurred on both sides, the Court allowed bail. It cited constitutional guarantees and relied on dicta from Dataram Singh, noting the applicants had no criminal antecedents and the incident was a free fight.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail on personal bond without sureties immediately, with requirement to furnish sureties within a month after normal court functioning is restored.

Kishan @Jaynarayan and Another Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38877 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Kishan @Jaynarayan And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arvind Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Case called out in the revised call. None has appeared on behalf of complainant.

¶6

Heard Shri Vinay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and also perused the record.

¶7

By means of the present bail application the applicants are seeking their bail in connection with Case Crime No.161 of 2020, u/s 147, 148, 323, 452, 325, 504, 506, 304 I.P.C., P.S.Jalesar, District-Etah.

¶8

Submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that this is a case of free fight where two groups have mangled together and both sides have sustained injuries. From the side of the applicant an F.I.R. was got registered as Case Crime No.158 of 2020 on 4.5.2020 by Smt. Vigilesh against nine persons with the allegations that the prosecution side has assaulted upon them and causing injuries to four persons. On the other hand for the same incident dated 2.5.2020 an F.I.R. was got registered by Mohan Lal s/o deceased Karan Singh on 5.5.2020 naming ten persons of the opposite group, mentioning therein that there was one deceased and four other injured. Contention is that there is no justification coming forward as to how the applicant's side has sustained injuries and at this stage it is not possible to decide as to which group is aggressor over other group. The applicant is in jail since 13.7.2020 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 that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail

¶11

application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicants Kishan @ Jaynarayan and Ramkumar, who are involved in aforementioned Case Crime be released on bail on their 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 APPLICANTS SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT THEY 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 APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS COUNSEL. IN CASE OF THEIR ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶15

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANTS MISUSE THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE THEIR PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANTS FAIL TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THEM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶16

(iv) THE APPLICANTS 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 APPLICANTS 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 THEM 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 APPLICANTS.

¶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 applicants 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 applicants 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 applicants, shall have serious repercussion on their 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 :- 12.1.2021 M. Kumar

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishan @Jaynarayan and Another 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

Smt Sarvati Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Somvati Devi Vs State of U.P.

Dilip @ Munne Vs State of U.P.

Sulley Vs State of U.P.

Rampreet Sahni Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Kumar @ Pushpendra Singh Vs State of U.P.