Allowed

Rajendra Singh v. State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Home U.P.Lko

Allahabad HC18 Feb 2022/1513/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowed a criminal bail application filed by Rajendra Singh. The court granted bail on a personal bond and two sureties, citing parity with co-accused already released and the lack of evidence suggesting tampering with witnesses, while imposing strict conditions of appearance.

What did the court decide?

Applicant enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond and two sureties on conditioned undertaking to appear and cooperate in trial.

Rajendra Singh Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Home U.P.Lko — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 34

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1513 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rajendra Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Home U.P.Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Naresh Singh Chauhan,Bhoopendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The applicant, Rajendra Singh , has moved the present bail application seeking bail in F.I.R. No. 261 of 2021, under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 323, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Hasanganj, District Unnao.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per the prosecution version, on account of dispute with regard to the agricultural land, the applicant and other accused persons, who are named in the F.I.R., have assaulted Ramakant, brother of complainant by lathi-danda. Co-accused, Chandan Singh and Ajay Singh had given blow on the head of brother of the complainant by wooden rod, on account of which brother of the complainant fell down, and sustained severe injuries, and after one day he died in Trauma Centre, Lucknow.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that there is a cross case from the side of the applicant, bearing F.I.R. No.258 of 2021, which was lodged against three named persons and 2225 others, and in the said incident, two persons i.e. Chandan Singh and Ajay Singh were also received injuries from the side of the applicant. Nothing incriminating material has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. In the said incident, the deceased, Ramakant, has been pushed and fell down, as a result, he received injuries, but on the basis of concocted facts, the F.I.R. in question was lodged on 30.08.2021 at 18:48 hours in relation to the same incident for which the F.I.R. was already lodged by Chandan Singh (coaccused of the present case) from the side of the applicant. In the F.I.R. in question, 17 persons were named and during the course of investigation, charge sheet was filed against 9 persons and general allegations have been made against the applicant and other co-accused. The deceased, Ramakant, was having criminal antecedent of eleven cases.

¶9

Learned counsel further submits that the co-accused, Deshraj, Raghvendra Singh, Lallan @ Raj Bahadur and Prabhat Singh, who have been assigned general role of assaulting the deceased, have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 03.01.2022, 02.02.2022, 04.02.2022 and 09.02.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 15431 of 2021, 788 of 2022, 855 of 2022 and 1096 of 2022. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of the co-accused, Chandan Singh and Ajay Singh, who according to the F.I.R. version have assaulted the deceased on his head by wooden rod.

¶10

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 have been assigned general role of assaulting the deceased by wooden rod, have 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.

¶11

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 31.08.2021 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the courts, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶12

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

¶13

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 have been enlarged on bail and considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by

¶14

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.

¶15

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

¶16

Let the applicant, Rajendra Singh , involved in F.I.R. No. 261 of 2021, under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 323, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Hasanganj, District Unnao, 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 :-

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

(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.

¶22

(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 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.

¶23

(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.

¶24

(8) The concerned Court/ Authority/ Official shall verify the

¶25

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

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.

¶27

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.

¶28

Order Date :- 18.2.2022 Mustaqeem

¶29

Digitally signed by MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN Date: 2022.02.18 15:22:17 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rajendra Singh v. State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Home U.P.Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Singh v. State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Home U.P.Lko

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

Shiv Ram Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Shri Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Dewesh Vikram Singh Alias Rudra Singh Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home. U.P.Lko

Mohd. Afzal Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Ors.

Sachin @ Sachin Bhartiya Vs State of U.P.and Another