Allowed

Avi Kashyap @ Shivam v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Aug 2023BAIL/8140/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application challenging charges of murder and attempted murder, the High Court observed conflicting evidence and lack of victim corroboration, noting the possibility of honor killing. After considering the applicant's injuries and no tampering risk, the court allowed bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing personal bond and two heavy sureties, subject to conditions regarding no tampering and appearance for trial stages.

Avi Kashyap @ Shivam Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:168086

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8140 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Avi Kashyap @ Shivam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ishwar Chandra Tyagi,Abhay Singh Tomar,Adarsh Bhushan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Sharma

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the State, Sri Pankaj Sharma, learned counsel for the informant and perused the material on record.

¶7

The Crl. Misc. First Bail Application No. 50792 of 2022 has been rejected by this court vide order dated 12.01.2023.

¶8

This is second bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Avi Kashyap @ Shivam, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 678 of 2022, under sections 302, 307, 452 IPC and section 4/25 Arms Act, P.S. Highway, District Hathras.

¶9

According the prosecution version when the informant was going on, all the sudden he heard the shrieks from the house of his brother, he entered and saw that applicant was causing the knife blows on Sonam aged about 16 years, who was daughter of his brother. On rescue her mother came forward, the applicant again caused knife blows on her mother and thereafter the applicant himself caused knife blows upon him and fell down. Police immediately admitted the injured in the hospital, where the injured Sonam was declared dead.

¶10

The submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. In the present case the applicant himself received incised wound injuries and admitted in the hospital. It is a case of honour killing but the applicant has been falsely implicated. In the present case all the witnesses are of the family members of the deceased. There are so many persons were present but none independent witness has come forward to

¶11

support the prosecution version. No person can cause himself by knife repeatedly. In the present case only one witness P.W. 1 has been examined whereas there are total 19 witnesses of the alleged incident. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is languishing in jail since 08.07.2022 having no criminal history.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but accepted the fact that applicant of this case has also sustained injuries and it appears that it is a case of honour killing.

¶13

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all 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- Avi Kashyap @ Shivam, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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 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 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

Orer Date :- 21.8.2023

¶24

RPD

¶25

Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Avi Kashyap @ Shivam v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avi Kashyap @ Shivam 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

Tonu Pandey @ Devshankar Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Vicky Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Reeta Prakash Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raju Vs State of U.P.

Arunpal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ramji @ Krishna Kumar @ Babu Mishra Vs State of U.P.