Allowed¶12

Balak v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

Allahabad HC25 Jan 2024/609/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail allowed; applicant Balak; Case Crime/FIR No. 402/2021; Sections 323/304/506 IPC; P.S. Sandana, District Sitapur; alleged beating of father by lathi and danda on 05.10.2021 with rupture of left eye; custody since 06.10.2021; no criminal antecedent; 8 of 15 witnesses examined; PW-1 informant, PW-3 Asha, PW-5 Maharani, PW-6 Khubram, PW-7 Ram Kishun denied prosecution version; personal bond with two sureties; bail conditions incl. Section 229-A IPC, Section 82 Cr.P.C., Section 174-A IPC; decided 25.1.2024.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Balak enlarged on bail in Case Crime/FIR No. 402/2021 on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to the six bail conditions imposed by the court. ¶12

Balak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Balak enlarged on bail in Case Crime/FIR No. 402/2021 on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to the six bail conditions imposed by the court.

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Balak, accused under Sections 323/304/506 IPC in Case Crime/FIR No. 402/2021 (P.S. Sandana, District Sitapur) and in custody since 06.10.2021, should be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Court's answer

On due consideration that 8 of 15 trial witnesses had been examined, that the applicant had been in jail since 06.10.2021 without any criminal antecedent, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court found it a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

The bail application was accordingly allowed: the applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to six imposed conditions covering non-tampering with evidence, non-intimidation/inducement of persons acquainted with the facts, an undertaking not to seek adjournments when witnesses are present, and attendance on each date fixed, with defaults exposed to proceedings under Section 229-A IPC, Section 82 Cr.P.C. and Section 174-A IPC.

¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Karunesh Singh Pawar, J.) allowed Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 609 of 2024 on 25.1.2024. The applicant Balak, arraigned in Case Crime/FIR No. 402/2021 under Sections 323/304/506 IPC at P.S. Sandana, District Sitapur, was alleged to have beaten his father with lathi and danda on the night of 05.10.2021, rupturing the father's left eye, and had been in custody since 06.10.2021. With 8 of 15 trial witnesses examined, the informant (PW-1) and PW-3 Asha, PW-5 Maharani, PW-6 Khubram and PW-7 Ram Kishun having denied the prosecution version, no criminal antecedent, and the learned AGA unable to dispute these submissions, this court, expressly without expressing any opinion on the merits, held it a fit case for bail. Release was ordered on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions barring tampering with evidence and intimidation of witnesses, requiring attendance on fixed dates and an undertaking against adjournments, and warning that absence after a proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., or absence on evidence dates, may attract proceedings under Section 229-A IPC and Section 174-A IPC.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:7804

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 609 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Balak Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Vimlesh Kumar Kashyap Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

It is alleged in the prosecution case that the applicant used to beat his father. On 05.10.2021 at 10"O clock in the night, he has beaten his father by lathi and danda. In that incident, left eye of his father ruptured. The incident has been witnessed by the sisters of the accused-applicant as well as people from the neighborhood. The injured has been saved by the sisters of the informant and neighbors and admitted in the District Hospital Sitapur.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has been falsely implicated. He is languishing in jail since 06.10.2021. He submits that PW-1 (informant), PW-3 Asha, PW-5 Maharani, PW-6 Khubram and PW-7 Ram Kishun have denied the prosecution version in the trial court. He has committed no offence. Out of 15 witnesses, 8 witnesses have been examined. There is no question of tampering the evidence.

¶9

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

On due consideration to the fact that out of 15 witnesses, 8 witnesses have been examined; the applicant is languishing in jail since 06.10.2021 without having any criminal antecedent and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant, Balak, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 402/2021, under Sections 323/304/506 IPC, Police Station - Sandana, District - Sitapur, be released on bail on his 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:-

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(iv) 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.

¶18

(v) 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.

¶19

(vi) 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.

¶20

Order Date :- 25.1.2024 R.C.

¶21

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Balak v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balak v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Arif Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

Mateen Ahmad Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Raj Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Budhana Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Ram Dayal Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Panne Lal Saroj Vs State of U.P Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others