Partly allowed

Shani Agrahari and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 May 2022BAIL/14220/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 302 IPC, the High Court differentiated the roles of the father and son. Bail was allowed to the 60-year-old father with conditions to ensure trial attendance, while the son's bail application was dismissed due to his active role in the incident.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to applicant Tadak Nath Agrahari on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to attend trial and avoid abuse of liberty of bail.

Shani Agrahari and Another Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14220 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shani Agrahari And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- R P Rajan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant no.1 Shani Agrahari and applicant no.2, Tadak Nath Agrahari, father of applicant no.1, seeking their enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 531 of 2021, under Sections 302, 34, 308 IPC, Police Station Bhelupur, District Varanasi.

¶7

As per the prosecution version on account of prior enmity between the parties the son of applicant no.2, namely Bobby, stabbed one Brijesh and on his screaming elder brother of Brijesh, namely Kamlesh, rushed to spot and applicant no.1 got hold of him whereafter he too was stabbed by brother of applicant no.1. It is also alleged that when one of the other brother of the informant namely Preetam Sharma came on spot he also was held in the same manner by the applicant no.1 after their father (applicant no.2) exhorted and Bobby also stabbed him (Preetam). It is admitted that one of the three brothers, namely Brijesh, has died and the injured witnesses have testified against the applicants.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that role of causing stab wound is attributed to Bobby and the role assigned to the applicants is only of catching hold and exhortation. It is further argued that the applicant is in jail since 07.11.2021 and the trial is not likely to conclude shortly and that the applicants undertake that they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the conduct of trial.

¶9

Learned AGA opposes the bail application and states that the accused persons are the father and his two sons, who have inflicted repeated blows to the informant's brother due to old enmity and the nature of injuries caused to the deceased would not have been possible but the fact is that he has been held by the applicant no.1. Apart from the deceased the other brothers have also sustained injuries and the role of catching hold is

¶10

assigned to the applicant no.1.

¶11

Having considered the respective submissions advanced; perused the materials placed on record; considering the fact that role of catching hold is specifically assigned to the applicant no.1- Shani Agrahari, the bail application on his behalf is rejected . However, the applicant no.2, who happens to be father of applicant no.1, is assigned the role of exhortation in the statement of one of the witnesses and has no criminal history and is above 60 years of age as such he is entitled to grant of bail at this stage. Above observations made in the bail order shall, however, not be construed as expression of opinion, on the merits, at the stage of trial.

¶12

Let the applicant no.2 - Tadak Nath Agrahari involved in aforesaid case 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, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

(i) The applicant no.2 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. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶14

(ii) The applicant no.2 shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or 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.

¶15

(iii) In case, the applicant no.2 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iv) The applicant no.2 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 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 against him in accordance with law.

¶17

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

¶18

Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶19

Order Date :- 11.5.2022 Ashok Kr.

¶20

Digitally signed by ASHOK KUMAR Date: 2022.05.12 14:04:05 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shani Agrahari and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shani Agrahari and Another v. State of U.P.

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

Akash Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Nandani Vs State of U.P.

Manish Vs State of U.P.

Nakul Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Subhash Vs State of U.P.

Sunny Vs State of U.P.