Allowed

Sripal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2023BAIL/28268/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 CrPC regarding a murder charge, the High Court distinguished the unarmed applicant from the armed co-accused who was the primary informant of the attack. Finding no incriminating material against the applicant, the Court released him on bail with strict conditions regarding attendance, evidence tampering, and court appearances.

What did the court decide?

Sripal was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount.

Sripal Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:132259

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28268 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sripal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Sisodia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Gaurav Sisodia, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Sripal, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 0542 of 2022, under Section 302 IPC, registered at P.S. Hafizganj, District Bareilly.

¶8

The first information report of the case was lodged on 20.11.2022 by Yogesh against the applicant, co-accused Chhabinath, father of the applicant and Brij Mohan, brother of the applicant alleging therein that his grandfather has four sons, namely, Shyamcharan, Bhoopram, Murarilal and Chhabinath. All the sons live separately. On 18.11.2022, the deceased had sold his trees of sheesham, gular and jamun for Rs.80,000/-. He used to take his meals in the house of Bhoopram. On 20.11.2022 the informant was present in the house; at about 10:30, he was informed by cousin Mahendrapal that Chhhabinath armed with banka along with two sons namely Sripal present applicant and Brij Mohan in a hurried manner went in the house of Bhoopram after which voice of his grandfather shouting to save himself came out and then they were seen running out of the house. He then went to the place of occurrence and found his grandfather Khayaliram to have received injuries. His dead body is lying in the courtyard. The weapon of assault is also lying near his head.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. It is argued that the applicant has not been assigned any specific role in the first information report. It is argued that the first information report has been lodged on the information given by Mahendrapal. It is argued that even otherwise in the first information report it is alleged that co-accused Chhabinath was armed with banka but there is no assertion therein that

¶10

the applicant was armed with any weapon. It is argued that insofar as the applicant is concerned, his case stands on different footing. It is argued that only banka (assault weapon) was recovered from the place of occurrence near the dead body of the deceased. It is argued that there is no recovery of any incriminating material either from possession or from pointing out of the applicant, para-17 of the afÏdavit has been placed before the Court. It is further argued that case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of coaccused. It is argued that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 22 of the afÏdavit and is in jail since 21.11.2022.

¶11

Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the the applicant was seen going with the co-accused Chhabinath who his father. It is further argued that applicant is grandson of the deceased. It is further argued that the applicant went with his father Chhabinath who was armed with banka who assaulted the deceased. It is argued that as such applicant along with his brother Brijmohan have actively participated in commission of the crime. It is further argued that the alleged banka has been recovered from the place of occurrence which finds reference in the site plan prepared by the Investigating OfÏcer on 20.11.2022 and is stated to be found at 'Point E' which is stated to be blood stained.

¶12

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that first information report has been lodged on the information of the informant from Mahendrapal. Co-accused Chhabinath was stated to be armed with banka which was recovered from the place of occurrence as per the site plan. Applicant is stated to be unarmed. Case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co-accused Chhabinath.

¶13

Looking to 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.

¶14

Let the applicant Sripal , 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:-

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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 sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC.

¶20

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour 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 :- 5.7.2023 Mukesh Kr.

¶24

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶25

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

Sripal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sripal 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

Sunil Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Vs State of U.P.

Shahnoor Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Sankhwar Vs State of U.P.

Akash Vs State of U.P.

Durvijay Chauhan @ Vijay Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others