Allowed

Kamal Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Oct 2023BAIL/42435/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to Kamal Singh in a case of culpable homicide. The court noted the deceased was his father, witnesses turned hostile, and there was no weapon used. Bail granted subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed to Kamal Singh on personal bond and two sureties subject to six conditions including attendance in court and non-tampering with evidence.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:194869

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42435 of 2021

¶4

Applicant :- Kamal Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Gautam,Amit Kumar Gaur,Karmendra Kumar,Mohammad Zakir,Shiv Vilas Mishra,Shyam Babu Vaish Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Karmendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Triveni Saran Rai, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although he has taken time to file the statements of other witnesses apart from PW-1 to PW-4 recorded during trial but till date no other witnesses have been examined and as such no supplementary affidavit has been filed. He submits that the matter be argued and heard and be decided. The Court thus proceeds to hear the matter.

¶9

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Kamal Singh, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 1142 of 2021, under Section 304 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Aurangabad, District Bulandshahr.

¶10

The FIR of the matter was lodged on 30.06.2021 by Smt. Phoolwati against the applicant alleging therein that the daughter of her son Kamal Singh was unwell. On 29.06.2021 Kamal Singh asked for money from her husband Om Prakash for treatment which was refused on which Kamal Singh in a fit of rage assaulted him with wooden leg of the cot at about 10:30 am due to which her husband received injuries who was taken to government hospital where he was being treated but he died.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the present case is a case of sudden quarrel without any premeditation. There is no use of any weapon. It is argued that

¶12

the trial in the present matter has started in which Phoolwati the first informant and the wife of the deceased was examined as PW-1, Sukhpal the villager was examined as PW-2, Ramesh Chandra and Meghraj the villagers have been examined before the trial court as PW-3 and PW-4. All the said witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile. The said statements have been placed before the Court which are annexure 4 and 5 to the supplementary affidavit dated 10.04.2023. It is argued that the deceased was found to have received a single injury on his head and the cause of death is coma due to antemortem injury (head). He further argued that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 14 of the affidavit and is in jail since 01.07.2021.

¶13

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments as aforesaid.

¶14

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the son of the deceased. The first informant is the mother of the applicant. It appears that the present case is a case of sudden quarrel and assault by wooden leg of the cot. In the trial, the first informant and other witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile.

¶15

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.

¶16

Let the applicant Kamal Singh , 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:-

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

(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

¶20

abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶21

(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.

¶22

(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 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 229A IPC.

¶23

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

¶24

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.

¶25

The bail application is allowed .

¶26

Order Date :- 10.10.2023 M. ARIF

¶27

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶28

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kamal Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamal Singh 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

Smt. Nageena Vs State of U.P.

Alok Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikesh @ Vikas Vs State of U.P.

Fariyad Tyagi Vs State of U.P.

Bhanu Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ram Chandra Patel and Another Vs State of U.P.