Allahabad High Court
Ram Shankar [Second Bail] vs State Of U.P. on 18 February, 2021
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 28
Case :- BAIL No. - 7383 of 2019
Applicant :- Ram Shankar [Second Bail]
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Verma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amrish Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This is the second bail application. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected vide order dated 27.07.2018 passed in bail No. 7111/2017.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the fresh ground for filing the present bail application is that the evidence of PW-1 has been recorded before the trial court. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the informant while lodging the F.I.R. has not shown his presence on the spot neither the presence of his family members. However, while deposing before the trial court as PW-1, the informant has not only shown his presence but also the presence of his family members. The occurrence had taken place on 20.02.2017 at about 4.00 AM and the distance of place of occurrence is one kilometer from the house of the informant. It is submitted that this conduct of the informant has been doubtful and by this Court while disposing the revision filed by Rameshwar Pathak and Rajesh Singh who were initially accused, however, while filing charge sheet their names were dropped, has set aside the summoning order by which the revisionist were summoned. The copy of the judgment dated 04.09.2020 passed in criminal revision No. 1691/2019 is on record.
It is further submitted that till date out of eleven prosecution witnesses only one prosecution witness has been examined and whose testimony is doubtful as per the judgment passed in the revision.
It is further submitted that cause of death due to hemorrhage and shock as a result of ante-mortem injuries. It is submitted that even the injured witness has assigned the general role of assault and from the postmortem report it is not clear that who has caused the fatal injury.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.02.2017 without having any previous criminal history.
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.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, he is languishing in jail since 22.07.2017, till date only one prosecution witness has been examined out of 11 witness and so also the observation made by the court in the criminal revision No. 1691 of 2019 and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, for the period for which he is in jail 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.
Let the applicant, Ram Shankar, involved in Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 79/2017, under Sections 147/149/302/323 IPC, Police Station - Katra Bazar, District - Gonda, 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:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
Order Date :- 18.2.2021
R.C.
