Allowed

Ram Autar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Feb 2023BAIL/5040/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal bail application of the accused, releasing him on bail due to hostile prosecution witnesses and lack of criminal history, subject to furnishing a bond and strict attendance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions regarding court attendance and surrender of electronic copy of the order.

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

¶1

Court No. - 81

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5040 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Autar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar Srivastava,Noor Muhammad

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hari Shankar,Rajeev Malviya

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by the accused/applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Mr. Yogesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the accused/applicant, and Mr. D.P.S. Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the material available on record.

¶8

This is the first bail application filed on behalf of the accused/applicant. Learned counsel for accused/applicant submitted that accused/applicant has falsely been implicated on the basis of suspision. There is no eye witness account. The daughters of the deceased shown as eyewitnesses Kumari Neha and Annu have been examined before the trial court as P.W.3 and P.W.6 and they have not supported the version of the prosecution and declared hostile. He further submitted that other witnesses of facts including the informant have also been declared hostile and they have also not supported the version of the FIR. The accused/applicant is languishing in jail since 07.11.2020. The accused/applicant has no criminal history, as stated in paragraph No.9 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. Hence, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the bail application of the accused/applicant, but did not dispute the aforementioned facts that witnesses of facts specially the eye witnesses Kumari Neha and Annu have also not supported the prosecution case.

¶10

Considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record.

¶11

Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping in mind the statements of Kumari Neha and Annu recorded before the trial court, wherein both of them have not supported the case of

¶12

prosecution, without commenting on merit of the case, it appears just to enlarge the accused applicant on bail.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application filed on behalf of applicant is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant Ram Autar involved in Case Crime No. 345 of 2020, Under Section 302 of I.P.C., Police Station Rasoolpur, District Firozabad be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions;

¶15

(i) 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.

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iii) 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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(iv) 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.

¶19

(v)The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶20

(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶21

(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the

¶22

official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶23

(Mrs. Saroj Yadav, J.)

¶24

Order Date :- 8.2.2023 A. K. Singh

¶25

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

Ram Autar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Autar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chitranjan Kumar Sharma @ Chetan Vs State of U.P.

Nahna@ Kishan Vs State of U.P.

Abhay Kushwaha @ Pushpendra Vs State of U.P.

Vimal Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brahm Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mofil Vs State of U.P.