Allowed

Akash Singh v. state of u.p. thru prin.secy. home lucknow

Allahabad HC11 Feb 2022/1206/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding FIR involving murder and rioting, the High Court allowed bail for the applicant, a name surfaced in a co-accused statement but not in the FIR. Citing Article 21 and case law, the court noted no evidence of tampering and granted bail with strict conditions for appearance and non-activity.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for bail granted; applicant enlarged on bail on executing personal bond and two sureties with seven specific conditions.

Akash Singh Vs state of u.p. thru prin.secy. home lucknow — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 34

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1206 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Akash Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Firoz Ahmad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Firoz Ahmad Khan, the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The applicant, Akash Singh , has moved the present bail application seeking bail in F.I.R. No. 665 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 34, 120-B I.P.C. read with Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Aydodhya/ Faizabad.

¶7

According to the version in the FIR dated 14.10.2021 is that on 14.10.2021, eight named co-accused persons including one unknown person came to the house of the complainant and exhorted from the doors of the house of the complainant to come out, when the son of the complainant had gone out to see them, they had started indiscriminate firing on the son of the complainant. On hearing firing outside the house, the daughters of the complainant also come out, who have also received firearm injuries and subsequently the son of the complainant was succumbed to his injuries.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR. His name has been surfaced in the statement of the co-accused, Diwakar Singh, who was arrested on 17.10.2021. It is further submitted that the injured witnesses i.e. the daughters of the complainant in their statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. have taken the name of Diwakar Singh for firing on the deceased as well as on them. It is further submitted that in the statement of the coaccused, it has been stated that the applicant along with other co-accused persons were armed with lathi and danda, whereas there is no injury of lathi and danda on the body of the deceased as well as on the injured witnesses i.e. the daughters of the complainant as per the postmortem report and medical examination report respectively. It is further submitted that nothing has been recovered either from the possession of the applicant nor on his pointing out. It is further submitted that the

¶9

applicant has no criminal history.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the case due to ulterior motive. He is not named in the F.I.R., though eight persons have been named by the complainant in the F.I.R. During the course of investigation, as per the recovery memo dated 17.10.2021, four accused persons, namely, Diwakar Singh, Sudhakar Singh, Ritesh @ Ritik Singh and Upendra Singh were arrested and from their possession one pistol and two live cartridges were recovered. In this recovery memo it has been alleged by the police that one co-accused, Abhishek Singh fled away from the place of their arrest.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the coaccused, Anand Singh @ Annu, whose name was also taken by the co-accused, Diwakar Singh in his confessional statement, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 01.02.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 704 of 2022.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the case of the applicant is not on the worse footing than that of the other co-accused, who has been assigned same role and whose name was surfaced in the confessional statement of the coaccused, Diwakar Singh, has already been granted bail, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to get the benefit of parity and be enlarged on bail by this Court sympathetically.

¶13

Several other submissions regarding legality and illegality of the allegations made in the F.I.R. have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused, have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. The applicant undertakes that in case he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 24.10.2021 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the courts, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶15

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the Bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and also considering that the case of the applicant is not on worse footing than that of the co-accused, who has been enlarged on bail and considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another , reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶16

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶17

Let the applicant, Akash Singh , involved in F.I.R. No. 665 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 34, 120-B I.P.C. read with Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Aydodhya/ Faizabad, be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-

¶18

(1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶19

(2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the court below and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.

¶20

(3) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶21

(4) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶22

(5) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

(6) 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 default of this

¶24

condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶25

(7) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.

¶26

(8) 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.

¶27

It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.

¶28

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

¶29

Order Date :- 11.2.2022 Mustaqeem

¶30

Digitally signed by MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN Date: 2022.02.14 16:08:48 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Akash Singh v. state of u.p. thru prin.secy. home lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akash Singh v. state of u.p. thru prin.secy. home lucknow

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 Pinki Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. , U.P. Lucknow

Maya Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Home Dept. Lko

Smt. Urmila Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home Department, Government of U.P., Lucknow

Ashok Kumar @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P.

Subhash Goswami Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar Gautam Vs State of Up Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Anr.