Allowed

Shiva v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Nov 2022BAIL/52762/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge allowed a bail application filed by an applicant charged with offences under Sections 147, 323, 504, 325 and 308 IPC. The court directed release on personal bond and two local sureties subject to strict conditions regarding attendance and execution.

What did the court decide?

Release on personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions regarding court attendance and prohibition of adjournments.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52762 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shiva Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Pankaj Kumar Tripathi, the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned counsel for the State as well as perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Shiva with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 820 of 2022, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 325 and 308 I.P.C. Police Station-Highway, District-Mathura, during the pendency of the trial.

¶7

The informant Sachin Verma has lodged a first information report against the six named accused persons, namely, Golu, Sumit @ Kaliya, Shyam, Jagdish, Shivam and Rajveer Hukka along with 10-15 unknown persons on 25th July, 2021 at 23.20 o'clock alleging therein that on 25th July, 2021 at 09.00 p.m. the accused persons have committed marpeet with the brother of the informant, namely, Vinod and when the uncle and brother of the informant, namely, Bhawan Verma and Abhishek tried to save him, they also beat them by bricks, stone, lathi and Danda in which Bhawan, Saurabh and Ram Avatar Verma have sustained injuries.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is only for the first time that in the charge-sheet, name of the applicant as Shiva has surfaced in place of Shivam. From the version of the first information report and the statements of the injured recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C., only general role of assaulting the injured has been assigned to all the accused persons. No specific role as to who has caused injuries to the injured has been assigned to any of the accused persons. There is no direct or indirect evidence on record on the basis of which it can be said that the applicant is involved in the commission of the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the co-accused, namely, Punit @ Puru Sharma, Rahul Pahalwan and Sachin Kumar @ Golu have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 21st December, 2021, 13th January, 2022 and 10th February, 2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 46092 of 2021, 43076 of 2022 and 53525 of 2022 respectively. The case of the present applicant is similar and identical to that of the aforesaid co-

¶9

accused. As such the present applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. The applicant has no criminal history. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 3rd October, 2022.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Considering the nature of the offence, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant 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.

¶13

(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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(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. 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.

¶15

(iv) The applicant 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 sufÏcient 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.

¶16

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail

¶17

application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶18

(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 28.11.2022

¶20

Sushil/-

¶21

Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.29 09:27:26 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shiva v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiva 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Gopal Vs State of U.P.

Aman and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Rathi Vs State of U.P.

Vinay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Muzaffar Vs State of U.P.

Surjeet Vs State of U.P.