Allahabad High Court
Faiju @ Jhagru vs State Of U.P. & Anr. on 12 March, 2021
Bench: Saroj Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 32
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 768 of 2020
Appellant :- Faiju @ Jhagru
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Anr.
Counsel for Appellant :- Manzar Ali Khan
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Amrendra Tiwari,Pradeep Kumar Shukla
Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed by the accused appellant against the judgment and order dated 24.06.2020, passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No. 111/2020 arising out of Crime No. 213 of 2020, under Sections 304 IPC and 3(2)V of the SC/ST Act, Police Station and District Kheri whereby the bail application of the accused appellant was rejected.
Learned counsel for the accused/appellant argued that the accused appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the crime. The accused appellant was a Chowkidar in the field and the deceased along with other companions came to steal the crop. Being a Chowkidar, the accused appellant tried to save the crop with his Lathi and in that process, the deceased suffered injuries and unfortunately died. In the first information report, two more persons were named but their names have been dropped by the Investigating Officer. In the post mortem report, the cause of death has been shown as head injury caused by blunt object. The accused appellant is in jail since 10.04.2020 and he does not have any criminal history, as such, he should be enlarged on bail.
Contrary to it, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the accused appellant and argued that the weapon of offence i.e. Lathi was recovered at the pointing out of accused/appellant and eye witnesses Lavkush and Ashok Kumar have named the accused appellant in their statements and have clearly stated that after the incident only accused/appellant was seen near the spot, so the accused appellant should not be enlarged on bail.
Considered the submissions of both the sides and also perused the record.
Learned counsel for the accused/appellant has submitted that the accused appellant was a Chowkidar in the field. It is admitted fact that one of the eye witness namely Ashok Kumar initially named in the F.I.R. as an accused but during investigation his name was dropped by the Investigating Officer. Admittedly, there is no criminal history of the accused appellant and the accused appellant is in jail since 10.04.2020.
Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on merits, it appears just to enlarge the accused/appellant on bail.
Accordingly, the appeal/bail application is allowed. The impugned order dated 24.06.2020 passed by the Court below is set aside.
Let the appellant/accused Faiju @ Jhagru involved in Crime No. 213 of 2020, under Sections 304 IPC and 3(2)V of the SC/ST Act, Police Station and District Kheri 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:
(i) The appellant 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.
(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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The appellant 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 him in accordance with law.
(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 12.3.2021
Arun
