Allowed

Sukkhu @ Sukhe Nishad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Dec 2022BAIL/56518/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court Court of Allahabad allowed a bail application filed by Sukkhu @ Sukhe Nishad in a murder case. The court held that the applicant made out a case for bail despite the seriousness of the charge.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount, subject to specific conditions including maintaining presence in court and not seeking adjournments.

Sukkhu @ Sukhe Nishad Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56518 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sukkhu @ Sukhe Nishad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prakash Chandra Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. P.C. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Rakesh Soni, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Sukkhu @ Sukhe Nishad with a prayer to release him on bail in S.T. No.659 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No.245 of 2021, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police StationPaniyara, District-Maharajganj, during pendency of trial.

¶7

The FIR has been lodged through an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 30.10.2021 against four named accused including the applicant for the incident dated 22.08.2020, wherein, it has been alleged that 14 year old son of complainant has been done to death. It has also been detailed that the deceased had gone with the daughter of the applicant and annoyed by the same he was given a life threat by all the accused persons, therefore, under suspicion the FIR has been lodged.

¶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. There is no direct or circumstantial evidence to show involvement of the applicant in the death of the deceased. The emphasis regarding participation of the applicant in the incident has been made on the basis of statement of Indresh Vishwakarma and Prem Gond recorded on 03.08.2022 and Dharmendra Kewat and Ramdarash Kewat recorded on 16.08.2022, wherein, they have stated that they have seen the applicant coming from that side on 22.08.2020 but it is for the first time they have turned up after two years to give such a statement. In the statements of other witnesses there is no evidence to show participation of the applicant and only on the basis of suspicion, the FIR has been lodged. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.08.2022. 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

¶9

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 the applicant- Sukkhu @ Sukhe Nishad 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:-

¶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) 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.

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 16.12.2022 A. Pandey

¶19

Digitally signed by ANAND PANDEY Date: 2022.12.19 13:07:57 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sukkhu @ Sukhe Nishad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukkhu @ Sukhe Nishad 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

Kalawati Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Sonkar Vs State of U.P.

Raja Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Sangeeta Vs State of U.P.

Abrar Mulla Vs State of U.P.

Veerpal Vs State of U.P.