High Court allowed bail to the applicant accused under sections 307, 147, and others of IPC for alleged firing, relying on settled principles of bail and noting lack of forensic evidence.
Bail granted with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding witness interference and court attendance.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4081 of 2022
Applicant :- Awanish Tripathi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sumit Kumar Srivastava,Anil Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Mishra,Prashant Dubey
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Sri Sumit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Prashant Dubey, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Vyas, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Awanish Tripathi under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 568 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 427, 452, 504, 286 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, registered at Police StationRaniganj, District- Pratapgarh, during pendency of the trial.
As per the allegation of F.I.R. dated 17.10.2021, the applicant and other thirteen named co-accused persons, at 08:30 A.M. had opened fire by country made pistol. In the incident Govind Mishra sustained injury in his abdomen, leg and thigh. The bullet marks are present on the wall of house of informant. Applicant and other co-accused persons have prior enmity of land.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that general allegation of firing has been assigned to all the fourteen named persons including the applicant and the injured Govind Mishra also assigned general allegation of firing against all the accused persons. It is further submitted that five punctured wound were found having blackening but no size and dimension of the wounds have been mentioned in the medical examination report daetd 17.02.2021. Doctor advised for X-ray with regard to injury of thigh, leg and abdomen but no X-ray report has been prepared. Medical examination was conducted at District Hospital, Pratapgarh. It is further submitted that the co-accused Atul Tripathi @ Pushpendra has been granted bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application
No. 15326 of 2021 vide order dated 17.08.2022.
It is next contended that there is no other criminal antecedent to his credit. It is next submitted that there is also no possibility of the applicant either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. The applicant, who is languishing in jail since 11.11.2021 undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
Per contra , learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the court below and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. He further submits that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
It is a settled law that while granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of the evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, his role and involvement in the offence, his involvement in other cases and reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with.
Taking into account the totality of facts and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors., v. Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh & Ors., (2002) 3 SCC 598, Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee & Anr., (2010) 14 SCC 496 and Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar & Anr., (2020) 2 SCC 118 , the larger interest of the public/State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed.
Let applicant, Awanish Tripathi be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:
(i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) 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 of Cr.P.C.
(iv) 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 the trial court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
(vi) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that 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 in accordance with law.
The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavor and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the applicant, if there is no other legal impediment.
It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
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.
Order Date :- 23.8.2022/VPS
Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH SHARMA Date: 2022.08.25 10:40:09 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible for bail under Section 439 CrPC despite being accused of serious offences including attempted murder.
Whether the general allegations of firing against multiple accused and lack of forensic report justify granting bail.
Whether the applicant poses a flight risk or likelihood of tampering with witnesses warranting refusal of bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Awanish Tripathi
State Of U.P.
Sanjay Kumar Pachori
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
