Allowed

Sonu Giri v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Nov 2022BAIL/43694/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Sonu Giri in a murder case. Despite the charge sheet being filed and investigation completion, the court found it a fit case for bail, imposing strict conditions regarding trial attendance and consequences of default.

What did the court decide?

Releasement on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding court attendance and trial conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43694 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sonu Giri Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Suneel Kumar Mishra,Krishna Kant Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mani Shankar

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. Mr Mani Shankar, learned counsel for the informant is also present.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 219 of 2022, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, P.S. Handia, District Prayagraj.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that in the charge sheet only one eye witness, namely Shani Dewal @ Rinku Kannaujiya of the incident is alleged, who had neither assigned any specific role of assault to the applicant nor his presence on the spot. This witness has stated the role of causing injury with knife to the deceased has been specifically assigned to the co-accused Shani Giri and also the role of catching to the deceased has been assigned to the co-accused Luxman Pandey.

¶8

It is further submitted that co accused Akhilesh Giri has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 13.07.2022 passed in Criminal Misc Bail Application No. 25880 of 2022. Applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 22.4.2022.

¶9

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail. He submits that the investigation is now complete and the charge sheet has been filed.

¶10

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant- Sonu Giri, who is involved in aforementioned

¶12

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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 10.11.2022

¶21

RavindraKSingh

¶22

Digitally signed by RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.10 16:51:08 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sonu Giri v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu Giri 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

Shailesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Nisso Vs State of U.P.

Surjeet Singh Vs State of U.P.

Suresh @ Paupi Vs State of U.P.

Ritesh @ Vikas Vs State of U.P.

Urmila Devi Vs State of U.P.