Allowed

Ram Kailash and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC20 Mar 2024/394/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to two accused facing charges under culpable homicide, affray, and hurt sections for violence resulting in grievous injuries. The court noted prosecution witnesses turned hostile and a co-accused was already on bail.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail by furnishing a personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions regarding evidence tampering, trial cooperation, and refraining from criminal activities.

Ram Kailash and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:24787

¶2

Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 394 of 2024 Applicant :- Ram Kailash And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Gyanoday Shukla,Archana Rawat,Manju Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶4

Supplementary affidavit dated 18.03.2024 is taken on record.

¶5

Learned A.G.A. informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter, including upto date case diary.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This is the second bail application moved by the accused-applicants- Ram Kailash and Anil for grant of bail in Case Crime No. 261 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 308 IPC lodged at Police Station- Kotwali Dewa, District- Barabanki, during trial, as their first bail application has been dismissed as withdrawn and the same has not been adjudicated on merits.

¶8

Learned counsel for the accused-applicants has drawn the attention of the court towards the injuries of three injured persons, namely, Hariram, Raja Mahawat and Ramu Mahawat and vehemently submits that out of these three injured persons shown to have sustained injuries in the incident, two, namely, Hariram and Ramu Mahawat have sustained grievous injuries and these two injured persons have been testified before the trial court as P.W.-1 and P.W.-2. While P.W.-1-Hariram during the course of his cross examination has stated that at relevant point of time, when the incident had occurred, he was not present at the spot, as he had gone to Lucknow. The other injured, namely, P.W.-2; Ramu Mahawat has categorically stated in his chief examination that he has not been assaulted by the accused persons and had sustained injuries, as there was brick batting going on. It is vehemently submitted that two of the three star witnesses of this crime have not supported the version of the prosecution.

¶9

It is next submitted that applicants are languishing in jail in this case since 18.07.2023. The applicants have no criminal history. The star witnesses of the crime have already been examined before the trial court. There is no apprehension that after being released on bail, the applicants may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty. Identically placed co-accused person Deshraj has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 18.03.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3096 of 2024.

¶10

Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer of bail on the ground that three persons of the side of the informant sustained grievous injuries.

¶11

Perusal of the record would reveal that it is case of cross version of the incident, as cross F.I.Rs. have been lodged by the parties against each other. Four persons from the side of the applicants' are shown to have sustained injuries while from the side of the informant's party three persons are stated to have sustained injuries, namely, Hariram, Raja Mahawat and Ramu Mahawat. Two of three injured persons have been examined as P.W.-1;Hariram and P.W.2;Ramu Mahawat. P.W.-1;Hariram has become hostile, as he has not supported the version of the prosecution under cross examination and P.W.-2;Ramu Mahawat, since the beginning of his evidence i.e. in chief examination has not supported the version of the prosecution and has been declared hostile. The applicants are in jail in this case since 18.07.2023. The applicants have no criminal history. The material witnesses of the prosecution appears to have been examined before the trial court. Identically placed co-accused person Deshraj has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 18.03.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3096 of 2024.

¶12

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed.

¶13

Let the accused/applicants- Ram Kailash and Anil, involved in abovementioned case, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicants shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶16

(iii) The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicants and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶19

Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case.

¶20

Order Date :- 20.3.2024 Gurpreet Singh

¶21

Digitally signed by :- GURPREET SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Kailash and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Kailash and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Siddharth Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Ashish Kumar Singh Sisodiya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Rafiq @ Java Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Geeta Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko and Another

Gulshan Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Pappu @ Iqbal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.