Allowed

Chhotkau Singh (Second Bail) v. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary(Home),Civil Secretariat,Lko

Allahabad HC23 May 2022/111/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a second bail application. Relying on the subsequent examination and hostility of star witnesses, the release of co-accused on high risk charges, and the applicant's extended incarceration, the court found no likelihood of influencing the trial or tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two local heavy sureties subject to specified conditions regarding presence and cooperation.

Chhotkau Singh (Second Bail) Vs State of U.P… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 111 of 2022

¶2

Applicant :- Chhotkau Singh (Second Bail) Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Principal Secretary(Home),Civil Secretariat,Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Naveen Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Naveen Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Arti Gupta, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶5

This is the second bail application. The first bail application bearing Bail Case No.10823 of 2019 has been rejected by Ho'ble Mrs. Justice Saroj Yadav vide order dated 24.03.2021. However, vide order dated 22.04.2022, Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Saroj Yadav has released this bail application, as such, this case has been listed before the regular Court.

¶6

Sri Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that since this is the second bail application, therefore, he is cautious about the fact that he cannot take any ground which could have been taken in the first bail application, therefore, he is pressing the present application mainly on two grounds. Firstly, after rejection of his first bail application on 24.03.2021, the PW-1, Brij Nath Singh, PW-2 Anang Pal Singh and PW-3 Krishna Gopal have been examined and those witnesses being star witnesses have been declared hostile by the Court, therefore, if the present applicant is released on bail, there would be no apprehension of influencing the trial; secondly, after rejection of his first bail application on 24.03.2021, the co-accused, Shiv Murat Singh with whom this Court while rejecting the bail of the present applicant had observed parity, has been granted bail on 08.02.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.9569 of 2019, therefore, this may be considered a fresh ground to dispose of the present bail application.

¶7

Besides, the said co-accused, Shiv Murat Singh was having criminal history of nine cases wherein some of the cases are heinous relating to Sections 302 and 304 I.P.C. besides other heinous sections, whereas the criminal history of the present applicant is of three cases of the year 2018 under the same Sections i.e. 457, 380 & 411 I.P.C., Police Station-Nawabganj, District-Gonda, as indicated in para-23 of the bail application.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the

¶9

aforesaid fact reveals that the present applicant has been roped in three cases wherein he was not named and on the basis of the aforesaid case he was roped in one case relating to Arms Act whereas the co-accused Ram Murat Singh was having chequered criminal history, has been granted bail subsequent to the rejection of the first bail application of the present applicant.

¶10

As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 19.07.2019 in Case Crime No.111 of 2019, under Sections 302, 201 & 120-B I.P.C., Police Station-Tarabganj, District-Gonda.

¶11

While granting bail to Shiv Murat Singh, this Court has taken cognizance of the fact that the first informant, Brij Nath Singh and the witnesses Anang Pal Singh and Krishna Gopal in their statement recorded before the learned trial Court as PW-1, PW2 and PW-3 respectively have been declared hostile and they have not supported the prosecution case in respect of last seen and also regarding the commission of offence.

¶12

As per learned counsel for the applicant, all the aforesaid witnesses were the star witnesses. Besides, he has drawn attention of this Court towards extra judicial confession of the present applicant as well as recovery memo wherein more serious allegations have been levelled against co-accused persons, namely, Inshan Ali and Shiv Murat Singh. The coaccused Inshan Ali has already been granted bail by this Court on 18.02.2021 in Bail Case No.7755 of 2019. However, while rejecting the bail application of the present applicant on 24.03.2021, this Court has not given parity to the present applicant with the co-accused Inshan Ali by observing that the present applicant was with Shiv Murat Singh on the Motorcycle. The aforesaid co-accused Shiv Murat Singh has been granted bail.

¶13

Therefore, considering the period of incarceration of the present applicant i.e. about three years, all star witnesses have been examined and have not supported the prosecution version, the other co-accused persons, namely, Inshan Ali and Shiv Murat Singh have been granted bail and accused Shiv Murat Singh has been granted bail subsequent to the bail rejection of the present applicant, he may be enlarged on bail. The charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, there is no apprehension of absconding the present applicant or tampering with the evidence if the present applicant is enlarged on bail. He shall co-operate with the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order.

¶14

Learned Additional Government Advocate has however

¶15

opposed the prayer for bail of the present applicant but could not dispute the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. However, she has prayed for sometime to file counter affidavit.

¶16

On being confronted on bail order granted in favour of coaccused Shiv Murat Singh subsequent to the rejection of first bail application of the present applicant wherein this fact has been considered that all star witnesses i.e. PW-1 to PW-3 have been examined and have not supported the prosecution version, learned Additional Government Advocate has submitted that the same are the matter of record, therefore she has nothing to say. However, she has submitted that it is upto the trial court to arrive at the conclusion on the basis of other material available on record.

¶17

Without entering into merits of the issue and considering the fact that all the star witnesses i.e. PW-1 to PW-3 have been examined, the co-accused Shiv Murat Singh has been granted bail on 08.02.2022 after rejection of first bail application of the present applicant on 24.03.2021, on the basis of material available on record, the allegation of chequred criminal history of the co-accused Shiv Murat Singh is more serious than the present applicant and the period of incarceration of the present applicant for about three years and in the given circumstances there is no possibility to conclude the trial in near future, I am of the opinion that this bail application is liable to be allowed.

¶18

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶19

Let the applicant-Chhotkau Singh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two local and heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.

¶21

(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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial

¶23

and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fail 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.

¶25

(v) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

¶26

Order Date :- 23.5.2022 [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Suresh/

¶27

Digitally signed by SURESH CHANDRA Date: 2022.05.24 18:09:26 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Chhotkau Singh (Second Bail) v. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary(Home),Civil Secretariat,Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhotkau Singh (Second Bail) v. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary(Home),Civil Secretariat,Lko

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

Raj Kumar Vs State of U.P. through the Principle Secretary Department Od Home, U.P. Civil Secretariat, Lko

Chandani and another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Principal Secretary Home Lucknow

Bankey Lal Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Dept of Home U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Jagrani W/O Sri Gangaram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home

Kafeel Khan S/O Moteen Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home

Chandramani Mishra S/O Parasnath Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt.