Allowed

Manoj Kumar Prajapati v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Jul 2021BAIL/48330/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge bail application in an affray causing singular stabbing injury. Court granted bail after incarceration due to trivial nature of injury, lack of criminal history, and singular blow. Ordered release on personal bond without sureties temporarily, with strict attendance conditions to be refined later.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted with execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of courts restored; strict undertakings filed on attendance and evidence dates.

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

¶1

Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48330 of 2020 Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Prajapati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Lakhan Kanoujia Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶2

Heard Sri Sanjay Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶3

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.592 of 2020, under Sections 307, 324, 504 and 506 IPC, Police StationKokhraj, District-Kaushambi is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.09.2020.

¶4

Contention raised by the learned counsel for the applicant is that on account of a very trivial and insignificant issue, this incident of stabbing took place, though the applicant is sole named accused person who has given knife blow over the stomach of the injured Shiv Mohan.

¶5

I have perused the injury report, which shows that there is solitary stab wound/penetrating injury of 3 cm. Except this, there is no other injury over the person. It is just possible that in the passion of heat, this incident took place. There is singular knife blow indicates that there was no intention to kill the injured, nor any serious injuries to the vital internal organ of the body.

¶6

Learned A.G.A 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.

¶7

Taking into account that the period of incarceration undergone by the applicant and coupled with the fact that there is singular penetrating blow of 3 cm depth by the applicant having no criminal history, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶8

Let the applicant-Manoj Kumar Prajapati , 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:-

¶9

(i) THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE/THEY SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR EVIDENCE WHEN THE WITNESSES IS/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.

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

(iv) THE APPLICANT/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 APPLICANT/APPLICANTS IS/ARE

¶13

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 HIS/HER/THEIR IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶14

(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/APPLICANTS.

¶15

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

¶16

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/applicants to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶17

The applicant/applicants shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is/are restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 9.7.2021

¶22

Abhishek Sri.

Manoj Kumar Prajapati v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar Prajapati 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

Om Prakash Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunita Alias Savita Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anmol Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kapoor Chandra Maurya Vs State of U.P.

Vinod Kumar @ Pavva Vs State of U.P.

Mandeep Vs State of U.P.and Another