Allowed

Ramai v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Dec 2022BAIL/26473/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to the applicant, accused under Sections 302 and 120-B IPC. The court notes the seriousness of the offence but considers it a fit case for bail, referring to a precedent. The applicant is released on a personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to strict attendance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail subject to filing a personal bond and furnishing two heavy sureties along with undertaking to comply with court conditions.

Ramai Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26473 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ramai Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Lalji Yadav, Manvendra Singh,Yashpal Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.212 of 2021, under Sections 302 and 120-B IPC, Police Station Jahanabad, District Fatehpur.

¶7

The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has never committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. The applicant is not named in the impugned FIR. The applicant is a farmer and he has no concern with the alleged incident. The applicant is father of the main accused Ajay against whom main allegation of murder has been assigned. As per version of the FIR as well as statement of independent witnesses, there are material contradiction, therefore, no alleged offence is made out against the applicant. Further contention is that the informant, who is mother of the deceased, has stated that her daughter has committed suicide. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant 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. Lastly, it is argued that the applicant is languishing in jail since 24.03.2022 having no previous criminal history.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, but could not controvert the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2 but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant- Ramai involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions :

¶11

(i) 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.

¶12

(ii) The applicant 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 IPC.

¶13

(iii) 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 IPC.

¶14

(iv) 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.

¶15

(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶17

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶18

Order Date :- 14.12.2022

¶19

Ajeet

¶20

Digitally signed by AJEET KUMAR PATEL Date: 2022.12.14 13:05:25 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramai v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramai 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kapil Dev Vs State of U.P.

Hasina Begum Vs State of U.P.

Shadab Vs State of U.P.

Shivkant Vs State of U.P.

Ram Avatar Vs State of U.P.

Komal Pal Vs State of U.P.