Allowed

Rajmala v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2023BAIL/10495/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a second bail application moved on behalf of Rajmala, convicted under Section 306 IPC. The court found no convincing material to indicate tampering with evidence and enlarged the applicant on bail with local sureties and strict conditions regarding attendance and testimony.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties subject to specific conditions.

Rajmala Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:181041

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10495 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Rajmala Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhakar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

This is the second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant. The first Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.36017 of 2021 has been rejected by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajit Singh vide order dated 24.12.2021.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶8

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the F.I.R. was lodged after a delay of six days without any plausible explanation. He further submits that by the efflux of time, trial began and during the trial, the statement of P.W.1 was recorded and a copy of his statement is annexed as Annexure-2 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application, in which P.W.-1 stated that the incident took place about two years ago and the death of deceased was made herself or accused of this case. In his statement material contradictions are involved. P.W.-1 in his statement recorded before the trial court, stated that the names of Rajmala and Komil have got written on the basis of suspicion. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 20.06.2021 having no criminal history.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

¶10

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view, that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Let applicant - Rajmala involved in Case Crime No.168 of 2021, S.S.T. No.241 of 2021, under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station - Behjoi, District Sambhal, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

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

¶13

(ii) The applicant 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.

¶14

(iii) The applicant 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.

¶15

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.

¶16

(v) The applicant 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

¶17

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 him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶18

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

¶19

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 in accordance with law.

¶20

The bail application is allowed .

¶21

Order Date :- 19.9.2023 Atul

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajmala v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajmala 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

Ashish Rai Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sompal Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Maina Devi Vs State of U.P.

Hasnain Hasan Vs State of U.P.

Dileep Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.