Allowed

Mansuk @ Masuk @ Tilak Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Dec 2022BAIL/55073/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the applicant, Mansuk @ Masuk @ Tilak Singh, in a case involving grievous injury and death. The Court found that other similarly situated co-accused had been granted bail and held that the applicant had made out a sufficient case for bail.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on a personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions regarding court appearances and tampering with witnesses.

Mansuk @ Masuk @ Tilak Singh Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55073 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Mansuk @ Masuk @ Tilak Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Ajay Dubey, learned counsel for applicant, Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record.

¶6

This instant bail application has been filed by the applicant with prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.54 of 2022, under Sections 147, 323, 304 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Barhan, District Agra.

¶7

As per contents of FIR, the incident is said to have occurred on 11.04.2022 when the applicant along with co-accused is said to have attacked the informant with sticks, rod and bricks. Upon his shouting, the informant's father Raushan Lal tried to save him but was also attacked by the applicant and his co-accused. Specific assertion has been made in the FIR that the co-accused Sunil Kumar hit Raushan Lal on his head with a stick resulting in grievous injury and his consequent death.

¶8

Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him. General role has been assigned to all the accused persons. It is submitted that neither the postmortem report of deceased nor the injury report of informant corroborate the allegations levelled in the FIR inasmuch as the postmortem report conducted clearly states that no external injuries were seen and death has occurred as a result of myocardial infraction. It is submitted that the similarly the injury report of informant indicates a single abrasion on leftside over the scapular region and the injuries are simple in nature. He further submits that specific role for causing injury to the informant's father has been assigned to co-accused Sunil Kumar, who has already granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.09.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 36787 of 2022. He further submits that other co-accused of this case namely Lavkush and Hiralal, Yogendra, Naina having similar role have been granted bail by the co-ordinate Benches of this Court, vide orders 14.09.2022 and 23.11.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.36044

¶9

of 2022 and 37873 of 2022 respectively, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.10.2022. The applicant does not have any previous criminal history. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let applicant, Mansuk @ Masuk @ Tilak Singh , involved in the aforesaid 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

(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.

¶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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶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. 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.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii)

¶17

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 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.

¶18

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶19

Order Date :- 8.12.2022 Rahul.

¶20

Digitally signed by RAHUL GOSWAMI Date: 2022.12.12 17:31:16 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mansuk @ Masuk @ Tilak Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mansuk @ Masuk @ Tilak Singh 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

Chandrapal Vs State of U.P.

Bhuri Singh @ Bhura Vs State of U.P.

Rajat Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Sher Singh Alias Mohan Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vishnu Singh Vs State of U.P.

Guddu @ Peetam Lal Vs State of U.P.