Allowed

Sangram and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home, Lucknow

Allahabad HC10 Sept 2024BAIL/9675/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed bail to Sangram and Krishna in a criminal case under various IPC sections involving assault and public nuisance. The court noted lack of criminal history, no chargesheet, and absence of flight risk despite grievous injuries.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicants on bail by personal bond with two sureties each, subject to specific conditions regarding attendance and undertaking against adjournments.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:62886

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9675 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sangram And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home, Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Ramakar Shukla,Aman Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J .

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

By means of the instant bail application, the applicants seek bail in respect of Case Crime No.349 of 2023 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 34, 325, 308 I.P.C. relating to P.S. Chanda, District Sultanpur.

¶8

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that on account of previous animosity between the families of the complainant and the applicants, the instant FIR has been lodged.

¶9

It is urged that the alleged incident is dated 13.08.2023 wherein it is stated that Mohan, the husband of the complainant, was returning from work, at that time, the applicant no. 1, who is said to have been driving a motorcycle rashly dashed against Sri Mohan who received injuries. As he reached home with much difficulty and with aid of the neighbours, at that time, the other co-accused including the present applicants are said to have reached the house of the Mohan and thereafter they beat him and hit the sons of the complainant and it is in this context, the First Information Report has been lodged.

¶10

The submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that insofar as the Mohan is concerned, his injuries are attributed to rash driving of the motor cycle and it being dashed against Mohan by the applicant no. 1 and not by the applicant no. 2.

¶11

It is further stated that as far as injuries to Vijay Bhadur, Satyam and Ashish are concerned even in respect thereto vague and very general allegations have been leveled. On the said basis, it cannot be said that the present applicants were the aggressor or that the applicants had specifically beaten any particular

¶12

injured.

¶13

It has further been pointed out that apart from the instant case, the applicants do not have any criminal history and he has been in Jail since 09.08.2024. It has also been submitted that the other co-accused Beeru Gautam and Abhishek Gautam have already been enlarged on bail by this Court by means of its order dated 09.05.2024 and 27.08.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4990 of 2024 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9053 of 2024 respectively.

¶14

Learned A.G.A., on the basis of material in the case diary available with him, has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that since grievous injuries have been sustained by the injured, hence, the bail application deserves to be dismissed.

¶15

The Court has considered the rival submissions and also perused the material on record. It is noticed that the applicants do not have any criminal history and they have been in Jail since 09.08.2024.

¶16

The record further reveals that the mother of the applicants had lodged a FIR against the complainant's family wherein they have been chargesheeted. Moreover, the applicants were not arrested during investigation and charge sheet has been filed, coupled with the fact, the offences of which applicants are charged are punishable up to 7 years.

¶17

Considering the rival submissions, the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record as well as considering the nature of allegations and accusation against the applicant, the severity of the punishment if convicted and the period of incarceration as well as the fact that no apprehension has been expressed by the learned AGA that the applicant is at the risk of fleeing justice or that he would tamper with evidence or influence any witness, hence, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Let the applicants Sangram And Krishna involved in the aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶19

At the time of executing required sureties the following conditions shall be imposed in the interest of justice.

¶20

(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence

¶21

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.

¶22

(ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

(iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

(iv) The applicants 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. 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 them in accordance with law.

¶25

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

¶26

O rder Date :- 10.9.2024 Asheesh

¶27

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

Sangram and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home, Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sangram and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home, Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pannalal Vs Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Kadipur, Sultanpur and Others

Ram Manoratha Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Deptt. of Revenue, Lucknow and Others

Smt. Ranjana Devi Vs Tahsildar, Tahsil Kunda, Pratapgarh and Others

Palak Jain vs Praful Kumar Jain

Jiya Ram Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. and 15 Others

Aman Deep Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue,Lko. and 3 Others