In a bail application under Sections 323 and 307 IPC, the High Court allowed the applicant's petition. The court noted discrepancies regarding the applicant's arrest timing and the absence of an X-ray report, deeming the case fit for bail release on a personal bond and two sureties.
Release of the applicant on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 58112 of 2022
Applicant :- Khempal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kaushal Kumar,Mohit Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vashishtha Dhar Shukla
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
None appeared on behalf of the informant. However, learned AGA for the State is present.
Heard Sri Mohit Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Varun Kumar Agnihotri, learned Brief Holder for the State.
The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 796 of 2022, under Sections 323, 307 IPC, Police Station Tajganj, District Agra during pendency of the trial.
FIR of the present case was lodged against applicant and coaccused Hariom under Sections 307, 323 IPC and according to the FIR applicant and co-accused Hariom inflicted the knife injuries to the driver of the informant, namely Rishi Kumar.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that entire allegation made against the applicant is totally false and baseless and in fact some dispute between Hariom, the driver of the informant and informant was pending and as per statement of injured it appears that two guards of the society arrived at spot and they witnessed that Hariom was having blood stained knife in his hand and they further stated that applicant and co-accused Hariom were handed over to the police but from the perusal of the case diary, which has annexed as Annexure SA-2 to the supplementary affidavit, it appears that applicant was arrested on 16.10.2022 and this fact completely belies the statement of guards of the society, who stated that applicant was arrested at spot along with co-accused Hariom. He further submits that although injured sustained as many as nine injuries on various parts of the body and X-ray was advised but there is no X-ray report on record and it appears that no X-ray was conducted, therefore, it appears that injuries sustained to injured were not dangerous to life. He further submits
that applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 15.10.2022.
Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that as per the statement of the injured and FIR, applicant also inflicted knife injuries along with co-accused Hariom but he could not dispute the fact that as per statements of the guards of the society applicant and co-accused Hariom were apprehended at spot but from the parcha of the case diary, applicant was apprehended on 16.10.2022 i.e. after two days as date of incident is 14.10.2022. He further could not dispute the fact that there is no X-ray report on record.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
Although, it is a case, in which, as per FIR and the statement of injured applicant and co-accused Hariom inflicted knife injuries to the injured but incident is said to have been taken on 14.10.2022 and the incident occurred in the flat of the informant, which was situated in the society and as per statement of injured after hearing the noises two guards of the society arrived at spot and when the statement of both the guards were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. then they stated that they witnessed that co-accused Hariom was having blood stained knife in his hand and applicant was apprehended at spot but from the AnnexureSA-2, the parcha of the case diary applicant was apprehended on 16.10.2022 i.e. after two days from the alleged date of incident.
Further, from the perusal of the injury report, it appears that injured sustained as many as nine injuries and X-ray was advised but no X-ray is on record, therefore, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that injured did not sustain any serious injuries could not be ruled out.
Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 15.10.2022.
Therefore, from the discussion made above, in view of this Court, it is a fit case to release the applicant on bail.
Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .
Let the applicant - Khempal be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 12.4.2023
AK Pandey
Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible for release on bail in a case involving allegations of afflicting knife injuries.
Khempal
State of U.P.
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
