Allowed

Kalawati v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Dec 2022BAIL/53097/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving alleged assault leading to death. The court granted bail subject to conditions ensuring the applicant's presence during proceedings and without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions regarding court attendance and conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53097 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Kalawati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Dwivedi,Arun Kumar Tripathi,V.K. Baranwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Diwakar Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed on behalf of informant, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.

¶6

Heard Mr. V.K. Baranwal, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Diwakar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Akhilesh Srivastava, learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 491 of 2016, under Sections302, 323, 504 IPC, Police Station- Nawabganj, DistrictPrayagraj.

¶8

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that there was a fight between the applicant's side and the informant, that is to say, his family members and the deceased over a right to irrigate their respective fields that suddenly turned violent where the role of shooting has been assigned to Prabhakar Singh whereas the applicant Kalawati, his daughter Anchal and her husband Jagdish Singh have been assigned the role of assault with sticks (Danda) and Fawra (an agricultural tool using for digging field)in the statement of an injured witness; the role of shooting is confined to Prabhakar Singh whose shot hit the deceased Ranjeet Singh; learned counsel submits that from a reading of the prosecution story, no common intention can be gathered at this stage. So far as the applicant is concerned, his complicity if at all is very marginal in the occurrence which otherwise, according to the learned counsel for the applicant, is entirely a fabricated story.

¶9

Learned AGA as well as counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer of bail. From the statement of the deceased recorded on 29.11.2016 prior to his death role of causing fire arm injury has been assigned to Prabhakar Singh and the applicant along with others assaulted the deceased with other family members with a common intention, and, therefore, the applicant notwithstanding the assigned weapon is vicariously liable for

¶10

the offence committed by the co-accused Prabhakar Singh. It is stated that after taking note of entire facts and circumstances of the case, co-accused, namely, Jagdish Singh husband of the applicant has been assigned the same role has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 15.08.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8590 of 2017. Accordingly, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, she may flee from the course of law or may, otherwise, misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is a lady and in jail since 12.11.2021 and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is very bleak.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in mind that co-accused has already been released on bail by this Court and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶12

Let applicant namely Kalawati be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number on her furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she 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.

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(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

¶17

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 her in accordance with law.

¶18

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶19

However, it is expected that the trial court shall make all sincere endeavours to expedite the proceedings of the trial and conclude the same as expeditiously as preferably within a period of one year . It goes without saying that if the prosecution witnesses are not turning up deliberately, then the court below has all the powers to adopt all the coercive measures provided under the Code in order to procure the presence of the witnesses.

¶20

Order Date :- 15.12.2022 Arti

¶21

Digitally signed by ARTI SHARMA Date: 2022.12.20 16:43:40 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kalawati v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalawati 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

Maharam Vs State of U.P.

Akil Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Maya Rai Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Sonkar Vs State of U.P.

Raja Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Meraj Khan Vs State of U.P.