Allowed

Deepu Singh Solanki v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Mar 2023BAIL/3344/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail in a murder case against the applicant, citing uncertainty in investigation, overcrowding, and the right to speedy trial under Article 21, without expressing a final opinion on the merits of the charges.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions preventing tampering with evidence, ensuring attendance, and expediting the trial within one yea

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

¶1

Reserved on 28.02.2023

¶2

Delivered on 02.03.2023

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3344 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Deepu Singh Solanki Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Srivastava,Archana Singh,Sadhana Singh

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raju Kanaujia

¶7

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶8

Heard Ms. Sadhana Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Raju Kanaujia, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State.

¶9

There is allegation against the applicant and three named accused persons, namely, Kiran, Sonu and Uspendra in the first information report lodged regarding murder of the brother of the informant. It is alleged that on 26.03.2021 at about 9.15 p.m., the brother of the informant, namely, Dheeraj Gupta and Brijesh Kumar Rawat went to the tea shop on the calling of Shivam Nishad. Dispute of Shivam Nishad took place with the tea seller Kiran and her friend Sonu. Co-accused, Uspendra, also came and he called the applicant. Thereafter the applicant and three co-accused started beating his brother and Brijesh Kumar Rawat by danda . The applicant and Sonu fired on him. After suffering injuries he fell down. Thereafter all the accused persons vanished from the spot. On receiving information he went there and saw that Brijesh has been taken by his companion for treatment. He took his brother to M.C. Hospital, Panki and from there he was referred to Hallot Hospital, where he was declared dead.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there is allegation against the applicant and co-accused, Sonu that they fired on the deceased by country made pistols but in the post mortem report of the deceased only one gun shot entry and corresponding wound of exit has been found on the chest of the deceased. Therefore, it is not clear who out of two accused persons, have caused the fire arm injuries to the deceased on his

¶11

chest. There was no motive for the applicant to fire on the deceased. The dispute took place between Shivan Nishad and the co-accused persons on the tea stall of co-accused, Kiran and Sonu. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as the person who was called by the coaccused at the scene of incident. He is in jail since 28.03.2021 and has no criminal history.

¶12

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.

¶13

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the 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 trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant, Deepu Singh Solanki, involved in Case Crime No.04 of 2021, under Sections 302/307 I.P.C, Police Station Armapur, DistrictKanpur Nagar 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

2 of 3

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶22

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

¶23

The trial court is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant as expeditiously as possible, preferable within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶24

Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the trial court concerned within a week.

¶25

Order Date :- 02.03.2023

¶26

¶27

3 of 3

¶28

Digitally signed by :- SURENDAR SINGH NARANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deepu Singh Solanki v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepu Singh Solanki 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

Shekhar Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Abdul Vs State of U.P.

Sudheer Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sukhdev @ Sukhvindra @ Sukkha Vs State of U.P.