Allowed

Dharmendra Saroj and Another v. State of U.P Thru. A.C.S / Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Allahabad HC17 Aug 2022/3499/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3499 of 2022, the High Court allowed bail for applicants charged under Sections 147, 148, 304, 452 IPC. Considering the duration of detention, the lack of evidence linking them to fatal injuries, and precedent, bail was granted subject to strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants are released on bail on executing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to eight specific conditions including appearing in court and not committing以后再犯罪.

Dharmendra Saroj and Another Vs State of U.P Thru. A.C.S /… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3499 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Dharmendra Saroj And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. A.C.S / Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sachin Pratap Singh

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashok Kumar Yadava

¶5

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicants is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Sachin Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants- Dharmendra Saroj and Ram Kishor with a prayer to release them on bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No.101 of 2021, under Sections-147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 304, 452, 427 I.P.C., Police Station- Sangipur, DistrictPratapgarh, during pendency of trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. The first information report lodged against the applicants is based on false and fabricated facts. His further submission is that according to prosecution story, on 06.06.2021 while the first informant was sitting in the sahan of her house, the applicants along with coaccused persons hurled abuses to her and when the first informant and her family members resisted, they assaulted Ram Lakhan and other family members of the first informant with lathi, rod and bat etc. The injured, Ram Lakhan sustained injuries, who ultimately died on 06.06.2021. The cause of death of the deceased, according to post-mortem report, is shock and haemorrhage as a result of ante mortem head injury. The applicants who are said to be armed with bat have been assigned the general role of inflicting injury to the deceased and other injured persons. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that other injured persons have received injuries which are simple in nature. Even in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the first informant has not stated that the applicants caused head injuries to the deceased.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that the coaccused namely Shubham Saroj who is similarly circumstanced and identical role assigned as of the present applicants, have already been granted bail by a coordinate bench of this court vide order date 07-03-2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2246 of 2022 and the case of the applicants are not on worse footing than than of the aforesaid co-accused who has already been granted bail by this Court, therefore the bail application of the applicants may also be considered by this Court sympathetically and they are also entitled for the benefits of the same and to be released on bail.

¶11

Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicants have also been placed forth before

¶12

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 applicants that they are ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make themselves available before the court whenever required and are also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon them. The applicants undertake that in case they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial. It has been pointed out that the applicant No.1 has no previous criminal history and applicant No.2 has criminal history of one case, the detail of which is explained in para-3 of the supplementary affidavit dated 16-08-2022. It has also been pointed out that the applicants are in jail since 2.7.2021 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicants by submitting that the applicants along with coaccused persons had assaulted the deceased and other family members of the first informant. The injured, Ram Lakhan ultimately succumbed to his injuries on 06.06.2021. Therefore the applicants are not entitled to be released on bail. However, learned A.G.A. did not dispute the other aforesaid factual submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicants. He also did not dispute the fact that coaccused Shubham Saroj having similar role assigned as of the present applicant has already been granted bail by this Court.

¶14

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 in the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and considering the fact that aforesaid coaccused having similar role assigned as of the present applicants, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court. The cause of death of the deceased, according to postmortem report, is shock and haemorrhage as a result of ante mortem head injury. The applicants who are said to be armed with bat have been assigned the general role of inflicting injury to the deceased and other injured persons and other injured persons have received injuries which are simple in nature. Even first informant in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., has not stated that the applicants caused head injuries to the deceased and further 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 UP 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 applicants- Dharmendra Saroj and Ram Kishor involved in Case Crime No. 101 of 2021, under Sections 147/148/149/323/504/304/452/427 I.P.C., Police Station-Sangipur, District Pratapgarh be released on bail on their 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 applicants will not make any attempt to tamper with the

¶18

prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

(5) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial, in order to secure their presence, proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

(6) The applicants shall remain present, 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 applicants 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 them in accordance with law.

¶24

(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.

¶25

(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.

¶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 merits of the case.

¶28

Order Date :- 17.8.2022 GSY

¶29

Digitally signed by GULAB Date: 2022.08.18 17:06:52 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dharmendra Saroj and Another v. State of U.P Thru. A.C.S / Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmendra Saroj and Another v. State of U.P Thru. A.C.S / Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

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

Raj Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Bipul S/O Ram Sagar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Smt. Madhuri W/O Rajemdra Vs the State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

Shiva Alias Shiv Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Arif S/O Sharif Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Firoz Ahmad S/O Mohd. Younus Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko