Allowed

Sanjay and Anothers v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Mar 2022BAIL/9673/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Coram of Sameer Jain, J. and Sachin Tiwari. The court allowed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for appellants accused in a riot-related case causing death. Considering parity with other co-accused, lack of criminal antecedents, and the nature of the case, bail was granted with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants Sanjay and others released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties with strict conditions regarding future conduct and trial attendance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9673 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sanjay And Anothers Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Khare Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Sanjeev Kumar Khare, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Nitin Agrawal, learned brief holder for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicants namely, Sanjay and Charandas @ Rahul, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.198 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 325, 308, 304 I.P.C., registered at P.S.-Baksha District- Jaunpur.

¶7

The F.I.R. of the present case was lodged on 14.06.2021 under Section 147, 148, 323 & 308 I.P.C. against 14 persons including the applicants. As per the F.I.R. on 13.06.2021 at about 06:30 PM applicants along with others committed maar-peet with the complaints side and they were having rod and wooden stick and in the incident the uncle of the informant sustained serious injuries and fainted and informant and four others also sustained injuries. The injured Samarjeet Chauhan, uncle of the informant later on succumbed to his injuries and the case was converted into under Section 304 I.P.C..

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has contended that actually the complainant side was the aggressor and they on 13.06.2021 at about 06:30 PM assaulted the applicants side and in the incident from the side of the applicants four persons sustained injuries. The F.I.R. of the aforesaid incident was lodged by coaccused Ram Singh on 13.06.2021 at about 09:40 PM under Section 147, 148, 323 & 307 I.P.C. against ten persons including the deceased Samarjeet Chauhan and informant Sooraj Chauhan and therefore, the F.I.R. of the incident was lodged from the applicants side prior to the F.I.R. of the present case and it is a cross-case, therefore, applicants may be released on bail. Learned counsel for the applicants has further contended that similarly placed co-accused persons namely, Ram Singh Chauhan and Krishna Kumar @ Kirshna have also released on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order

¶9

dated 29.9.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.32919 of 2021. Therefore, the applicants are also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. It is further contended that applicants have no previous criminal antecedent and he has been languishing in jail since 05.01.2022.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that in the present case as many as 14 persons assaulted complainant side resulted the death of one of the injured persons and apart from that five other persons sustained injuries and as far as the case of the present applicants are concerned, admittedly, from the applicant's side, injuries sustained by the injured are having simple in nature therefore, the bail application of the applicants is liable to be dismissed.

¶11

I have heard both the counsel of the parties and perused the record.

¶12

Admittedly, in the present case both the side sustained injuries and the F.I.R. of the applicants side lodged earlier than the F.I.R. lodged by the complainant side and from the side of the applicants also four persons sustained injuries and there is no criminal history of the applicants and further similarly placed two co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail. Therefore, in view of the matter, applicants may be released on bail.

¶13

Let the applicants- Sanjay @ Charandas @ Rahul be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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:-

¶14

i) The applicants will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶15

ii) The applicants will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

(iii) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶17

(iv) The applicants will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of

¶18

bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.

¶19

(V) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229A IPC.

¶20

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavor and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶21

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶22

The bail application is allowed .

¶23

Order Date :- 21.3.2022 Sachin/-

¶24

Digitally signed by SACHIN TIWARI Date: 2022.03.24 10:41:01 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sanjay and Anothers v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay and Anothers 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

Lal Bahadur Vs M/D U.P. Jal Nigam and 3 Others

Suresh Chandra Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Kasim Bux Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Rajmati Dhangar Vs State of U.P.

Neelam Vs State of U.P through Its Secretary Home Up at Lucknow

Akhilesh Chauhan Vs State of U.P.