Allowed

Ajay v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Feb 2022BAIL/45492/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the Court observed no convincing material to suggest evidence tampering and allowed the applicant to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant- Ajay, be released on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with specific conditions.

Ajay Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 88

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45492 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ajay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shahroze Khan,Gaurav Kumar Shukla

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Surendra Mohan Mishra

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Shahroze Khan and Sri Gaurav Kumar Shukla, learned counsels for the applicant, Sri Surendra Mohan Mishra, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Pankaj Mishra, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Ajay, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 151 of 2021, under Sections 304, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Bansi, District Siddharth Nagar.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that although the applicant along with three other co-accused persons is named in the first information report and there is an allegation of his assaulting the first informant / Smt. Arbun Nisha, her husband Hazrat Ali and her sons Gulzar and Ashraf with lathi and danda but general and common role has been assigned to all the accused persons for assault. It is argued that as per the postmortem examination report, Hazrat Ali the deceased has received single contusion on his head which was the cause of death which has been described as coma due to antemortem head injury but there is no specification as to who was the author of the fatal injury. It is argued that the first informant / Smt. Arbun Nisha was although found to have three injuries on her body but the injury nos. 1 & 3 were opined to be simple in nature and for the injury no.2, she was advised X-Ray but no X- Ray examination has been conducted. Further Ashraf was reported to have had complaints of pain and the doctor has found no external injury on his body. Gulzar was found to have received four injuries and all the said injuries were opined to be simple in nature. It is argued that as such, the author of assault on the deceased is not known and general and common role has been assigned to the applicant and three other co-accused persons of assault. It is further argued that co-accused Vishal Chaudhary has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated

¶9

23.09.2021 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 31198 of 2021 (Vishal Chaudhary Vs. State of U.P.), copy of the order is annexed as annexure 12 of the affidavit. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 30 of the affidavit and he is in jail since 27.06.2021.

¶10

Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that in the present case, one person has lost his life and there are three injured persons and there is an allegation of the applicant along with three other co-accused persons to be armed with lathi, danda and assaulting the deceased and the injured persons.

¶11

After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that there are general and common role of assault by four accused persons including the applicant. The deceased has received a single injury on his head which was the cause of death. The injuries of other three injured persons are simple in nature. In so far as one of the injuries of Smt. Arbun Nisha is concerned, she was advised X-Ray but there is no X-Ray report to state the nature of the said injury. Co-accused Vishal Chaudhary has been granted bail.

¶12

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Let the applicant- Ajay , 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:-

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

The bail application is allowed.

¶22

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶23

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶24

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.

¶25

Order Date :- 8.2.2022 M. ARIF

¶26

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶27

Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD ARIF Date: 2022.02.10 10:16:34 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ajay v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Prema Devi Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Vs State of U.P.

Praveen Bharti Vs State of U.P.

Shivam Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Harwati Vs State of U.P.

Ram Pratap Tiwari Vs State of U.P.