Allowed

Brijbushan Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Allahabad HC25 Oct 2024/9133/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court on a bail application allowed the release of the applicant, an 80-year-old with no prior history and facing parity with a co-accused already granted bail. The court granted bail subject to strict conditions regarding witness tampering, court attendance, and potential proclamation consequences, while retaining no opinion on the case merits.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions regarding court attendance and witness protection.

Brijbushan Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:72676

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9133 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Brijbushan Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Harish Kumar,Harsh Vardhan Singh,Satya Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.0255 of 2024, under Section 323, 504, 506, 325, 326 I.P.C., P.S.-Huzoorpur, District Bahraich.

¶8

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that identically situated co-accused Raju Mishra has already been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.10814 of 2024, vide order dated 23.10.2024 and the applicant is seeking parity of the same. He further submits that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained in para 17 of the bail application and the applicant is an old person of 80 years and he is languishing in jail since 30.6.2024 and in case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate in the trial proceedings.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the applicant is involved in committing the aforesaid offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail but he could not dispute the fact that the identically situated co-accused has already been granted bail by this Court.

¶10

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that identically situated coaccused has already been granted bail by this Court; the applicant is an old person of 80 years; there is no previous criminal history of the applicant, which has been explained in para 17 of the bail application; the applicant is languishing in jail since 30.6.2024 and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if granted and would co-operate in the trial proceedings.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶12

Let the applicant Brijbhushan Mishra involved in the aforementioned crime 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:-

¶13

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶14

(2) 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. He 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;

¶15

(3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and

¶16

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶18

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶19

Order Date :- 25.10.2024/Ram Murti

¶20

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

Brijbushan Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brijbushan Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bhim Saroj Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Chaman Singh Vs Union of India Thru. Intelligence Officer N.C.B Lko

Mosin @Mohsim Vs state of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home and others

Amresh Sonkar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Brijbushan Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Vikas Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.