Single judge allowed bail to the applicant, a brother-in-law of the deceased accused in a burning death case. The court considered trial delay and jail overcrowding. Conditional bail was granted with directed trial completion within a year.
Applicant released on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding trial attendance and conduct.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6498 of 2020
Applicant :- Satish Kesarwani Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Gupta,Pradeep Saxena
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dhirendra Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
There is allegation against the applicant that he has caused the death of the deceased by way of burning.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is the brother-in-law ( devar ) of the deceased. It has further been submitted that before the trial court, examination of P.W.2 is continuing. Applicant is in jail since 16.08.2019 and has no criminal history to his credit. The trial is not likely to be concluded in near future.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Satish Kesarwani, involved in Case Crime No.304 of 2019, under Sections 34, 326, 323 & 302 I.P.C., Police Station- Daraganj, District- Allahabad, 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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.
(v) 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
The trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one year.
Order Date :- 12.9.2022 SS
Digitally signed by SURENDAR SINGH NARANG Date: 2022.09.16 15:57:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant charged with murder in a case involving delay in trial.
Whether the applicant has satisfied the requirements for bail considering the length of trial and jail overcrowding.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and anotherRelied on¶10
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I.Referred¶10
S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021
6 provisions across 2 enactments
Satish Kesarwani
State of U.P.
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
