Allowed

Shiv Giri v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Jan 2024/694/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal appeal challenging the order rejecting bail. Finding an FIR lodged 10 days after the incident without an immediate complaint post-inquest and noting the trial's indefinite duration, the High Court set aside the rejection and granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order setting aside the bail application rejected is set aside; appellant released on bail upon furnishing bond and sureties.

Shiv Giri Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:6897

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 694 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Shiv Giri Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rakesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Prabhu Sharan

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State and Ms. Deepali Prajapati, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2.

¶7

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 10.02.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Bail Application No. 1152 of 2023 arising out of F.I.R. No. 337 of 2022, under Section 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Indira Nagar, District Lucknow.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that as per the prosecution case, the body of the deceased was found on 11.11.2022 and the inquest of the body of the deceased was conducted in presence of Jagpal Gautam, who is the father of the deceased, but no complaint, as mentioned in the F.I.R., was made to the ofÏcers, who conducted inquest of the body of the deceased. It is also submitted that after about 10 days, F.I.R. was lodged on 21.11.2022 with the presumption that the son of the informant was killed by the appellant. It is also submitted that except the confessional statement, no evidence is found against the appellant. It is lastly submitted that the court below has not considered all these facts while rejecting the bail application and the trial is also not going on. It is, thus, submitted that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appellant, who does not have any criminal antecedent and is in jail since

¶9

22.11.2022, is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the appellant is ready to cooperate in the trial.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant oppose the prayer of the appellant and submit that the appellant, in his confessional statement, stated that he is drug addict and on the date of incident, 'smack' was consumed by the appellant as well as the son of the informant and after quarrel, he was killed by the appellant. However, they do not dispute the fact that the body of the deceased was recovered on 11.11.2022, but no complaint was made by the informant to the police ofÏcials, who conducted the inquest of the body of the deceased.

¶11

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the complainant and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that the F.I.R. was lodged after about 10 days from the date of incident. It is also evident that at the time of inquest, the informant was present, but he has not made any complaint to the ofÏcers, who conducted the inquest of the body of the deceased.

¶12

In view of above facts and circumstances as also keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

¶13

Impugned order dated 10.02.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Bail Application No. 1152 of 2023 arising out of F.I.R. No. 337 of 2022, under Section 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Indira Nagar, District Lucknow is hereby set aside.

¶14

Let appellant, Shiv Giri be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :-

¶15

(i) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will 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 appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iii) In case, the appellant 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 appellant 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 appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufÏcient 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

Order Date :- 24.1.2024 VKS

¶20

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shiv Giri v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Giri v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. and Another

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

Amit Dwivedi vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Maulik Saraswat (Minor Corpus) Thru. His Mother Smt. Swati Sharma vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and 4 Others

Dhananjay Kumar Patra vs State of U.P. and Another

Arvind Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 2 Others

Satya Narayan Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Jahaji @ Amarchandra and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another