Allowed

Kallu @Shamshad v. State of U.P. Thru. Principal Secretary Home

Allahabad HC23 Nov 2022/1112/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the bail application of the accused, Kallu @Shamshad, charged under Sections 307, 269, 270, 34 IPC and Disaster Management Act. Considering missing motive, no prior record, doubtful prosecution story, and another co-accused released on bail, the Court found it a fit case for bail.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court subject to mandatory conditions.

Kallu @Shamshad Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 27

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1112 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Kallu @Shamshad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Principal Secretary Home Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Madhavan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Mr. Anirudha Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶6

Instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 265 of 2020, under Sections 307, 269, 270, 34 IPC and 51 of Disaster Management Act, 2005, P.S. - Peeparpur, District - Amethi.

¶7

As per the version of the first information report, the injured person was attacked with knife by the present applicant, and his brother held the injured person.

¶8

The counsel appearing for the applicant contents that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the instant matter. He submits that there is no independent public eye-witness of the aforesaid incident. He next added that allegedly there is one stroke of attack with knife over the throat of the injured person which clearly shows that there was no intention of attempting to murder of the injured person and that seems to have been done in sudden provocation, if any. He also submits that the motive is missing in the instant matter and the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent and the another co-accused Koore @ Salman @ Javed Shah, who was assigned the role of catching hold has already been enlarged on bail in Bail No.1835 of 2021, vide order dated 11.02.2021. He further added that as per the version of the first information report the injured person had become unconscious after allegedly attacked with knife by the present applicant but the statement of the injured/victim is evident that he came to his house and he was conscious after the aforesaid attack which also belies the story of the prosecution and creates doubt. He next added that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and is languishing in jail since 02.08.2020. He also added that the chargesheet has been filed in the instant matter and as such there is no possibility of

¶9

tampering with the evidence and threatening the witnesses. He next added that there is no possibility of completion of trial in the near future and he is languishing in jail since more than two years. He submits that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State vehemently opposed the contention aforesaid and submits that the present applicant is named in the first information report and the main allegation is against the applicant for attacking with knife over the throat of the injured person and injured has received injury that is corroborated with the allegation made in the first information report. He next added that the injured persons have also named the present applicant and as such, he is not entitled for any relief.

¶11

Considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it reveals that there is single injury over the throat of the injured person; from perusal of the story of the incident, the motive is missing through out the case; the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent; co-accused persons who was also named in the first information report, namely, Koore @ Salman @ Javed Shah, who has been assigned the role of holding the injured, has already been enlarged on bail; further the story narrated in the first information report seems to be doubtful as the statement of the injured under Section 161 Cr.P.C. belies the story, is being conscious at the time of the said incident; further, there is no previous criminal antecedent of the applicant; chargesheet has been filed and there seems to be no possibility of completion of trial in the near future and the applicant is languishing in jail since 02.08.2022. Considering the aforesaid facts, I find it to be a fit case for bail.

¶12

Let the applicant- Kallu @Shamshad involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:-

¶13

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶14

(2) 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. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or

¶15

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;

¶16

(3) 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.; and

¶17

(4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶19

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶20

Order Date :- 23.11.2022 KR

¶21

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶22

Digitally signed by RABINDRA KUMAR Date: 2022.11.25 10:22:35 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Kallu @Shamshad v. State of U.P. Thru. Principal Secretary Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kallu @Shamshad v. State of U.P. Thru. Principal Secretary Home

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

Shamshul Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Akhilesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Surendra Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Deepu Yadav @ Chhote Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Masook Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru, Prin, Secy. Home Lucknow

Naveen Patwa Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.and 4 Others