Allowed

Raju Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2023BAIL/1800/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court released the applicant on bail in a murder and injury case, citing overcrowding in jails and the fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount, subject to specific conditions regarding appearance and conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1800 of 2023

¶2

Applicant :- Raju Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mir Sayed,Abdul Saleem Ahamad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava

¶3

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Mir Sayed, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶5

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Raju Chauhan, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 85 of 2022, under Sections 323, 302, 504, 34 IPC, Police Station Naugarh, District- Chandauli, during pendency of trial.

¶6

There is allegation in the FIR against the applicant and co-accused, Komal Chauhan that they have caused injuries to the deceased by axe and lathi respectively.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out the post mortem report of the deceased, wherein one lacerated wound over left parietal upper side of the skull of the deceased, one lacerated wound on occipital region and minor injuries have been found on right forearm and blood was also found. He has submitted that there is no injury caused by axe on the person of the deceased, which may justify the implication of the applicant. The role of causing injury by lathi has been assigned co-accused. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 9.9.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently 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 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.

¶9

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, judgement dated 11.7.2022 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the

¶10

aforesaid crime 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 with the following conditions that :-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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 sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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 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.

¶16

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶17

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶18

Order Date :- 22.2.2023 Ruchi Agrahari

¶19

Digitally signed by :- RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raju Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Chauhan 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeev Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Chintamani@ Munna Mall Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Dohare Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pankaj Kumar Baghel Vs State of U.P.

Dheeraj Kumar Rai Vs State of U.P.

Shashikant @ Kakul Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others