Allowed

Lekhraj Singh and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 May 2022BAIL/8398/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to two applicants in a criminal case involvingSections 147, 148, 452, 323 IPC. The court held it a fit case considering the cross-FIR nature, lack of clear injury attribution by witnesses, and the bleak prospect of trial conclusion.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties of the like amount subject to conditions not to influence witnesses or misuse bail.

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

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8398 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Lekhraj Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Shanker Malviya,Deshraj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants seeking bail in Case Crime No. 622 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 452, 323, 324, 504, 506, 325, 326 IPC, Police Station- Thakurdwara, District- Moradabad.

¶7

The submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicant No. 1 is having no criminal history and applicant No. 2 is having criminal history of one case i.e. Case Crime No. 679 of 2008, under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.Thakurdwara, District- Moradabad. The applicants are in jail since 07.01.2022 and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely bleak. Further submission is that the charge-sheet in the case has been filed, as such, it is not possible for the applicants to tamper with the evidence already available on record or influence the witnesses of prosecution.

¶8

Further submission is that this is a case of cross FIR. In the incident, which took place on 10.10.2021, both the sides sustained injuries. The FIR from the side of the applicants was lodged on 27.10.2021 as Case Crime No. 624 of 2021 and the instant FIR was lodged on 26.10.2021. He further submitted that the injury report from the side of the applicants is on record as Annexure No. 9 to the bail application. Further submission is that in the FIR in issue, 11 persons have been named and from the FIR as also the statement(s) of the injured(s) namely Rajpal Singh, Smt. Chandrawati and Keshav, it is not clear that as to who was the author of injuries caused to them. They have not assigned any specific role of causing injury to anyone. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that in fact the side of the informant was aggressor, however, the same is subject to evidence adduced by the parties before the Trial Court. In these circumstances, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A., on the basis of instructions as also contents of counter affidavit, which is filed in the Court today and taken on record, has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the case including that injured(s) have not assigned any specific role to anyone.

¶10

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, period of incarceration, statement(s) of witnesses and injured(s) and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶11

Let applicants- Lekhraj Singh and Ravi Kumar be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime Number on their furnishing personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :-

¶12

(1) Applicants will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

(2) Applicants will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.

¶14

(3) Applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶15

(4) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶16

(5) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶17

(6) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶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

Order Date :- 18.5.2022 Arun/-

¶20

Digitally signed by ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR Date: 2022.05.18 17:07:50 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lekhraj Singh and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lekhraj Singh and Another 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

Indrapal Vs State of U.P.

Shubham @ Shivam Vs State of U.P.

Ambrish@ Gholu Shukla Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Alias Lala Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Pal and Another Vs State of U.P. and another

Jyoti Devi Vs State of U.P.