Allowed

Dinesh Sharma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Jun 2022BAIL/24907/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Sameer Jain, J. allowed bail application of Dinesh Sharma in FIR registration case involving assault and attempt to murder charges. Court imposed conditions seeking compliance with trial proceedings and warned of consequences for misuse of bail liberty.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions regarding attendance, non-tampering with evidence, and presentation before trial court for framing of charge

Dinesh Sharma Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24907 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Dinesh Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Srivastava,Virendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Arvind Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the case.

¶6

By way of present application, applicant made a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 20 of 2021 under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 and 308 I.P.C. P.S. Basai Arela, District-Agra during the pendency of trail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that initially NCR was lodged in the present case under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and later on the matter was converted into cognizable offence and Sections 308 and 324 were added. Further, submission is that from the perusal of the FIR it appears that there is allegation that applicant and co-accused Bhagirath assaulted the informant and her husband with wooden stick, but medical report of the informant clearly suggest that she sustained one incise wound on her parietal region, on the basis of which Section 308 I.P.C. was added and other injury of the informant was found simple in nature therefore, this fact clearly suggest that entire allegations made against the applicant is totally false and baseless, even the injury report of the husband of the informant suggest that he sustained only simply injuries and therefore, the applicant be released on bail and if in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate in trial.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that injury report of the informant shows that she sustained as many as 9 injuries but he could not dispute the fact that in X-ray report no fracture has been seen and most of the injuries are on non vital parts only, and the informant has sustained one incise wound on her parietal region, on the basis of which Section 308 I.P.C. was added and further as per the NCR and statement of injured persons no sharp edged weapon was alleged to have been used either by the applicant or co-

¶9

accused Bhagirath and further there is no criminal history to his credit.

¶10

I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. The record of the case shows that initially NCR under Section 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. was lodged but later on case was converted and cognizable offences under Section 308 and 324 I.P.C. were added. Further, the informant of the case sustained as many as 9 injuries out of which injury no. 1 was on parietal region which was incised wound. From the perusal of the NCR and statement of the injured witnesses it is evident that the allegations levelled against the applicant and co-accused is that they assaulted the informant and her husband through wooden sticks. But injury report of the injured informant shows that she sustained one incised wound which was caused by sharp edged weapon which was not explained and merely due to this injury Section 308 was added and further as per version made in NCR the incident occurred under intoxication therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Hence, the bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant- Dinesh Sharma be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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:-

¶12

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶15

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.

¶16

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A IPC.

¶17

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavor and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶18

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.

¶19

It is clarified that anything said in this order is 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. It is further clarified that 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.

¶20

Order Date :- 23.6.2022 SY

¶21

Digitally signed by SWETA YADAV Date: 2022.06.25 15:41:58 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dinesh Sharma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Sharma 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

Guddu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramkumar Mishra and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikrma Prasad Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Meena @ Savita and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shane Alam and Another Vs State of U.P and Another

Chintaharan Tiwari @ Cheeru Cheeru Maharaj and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another