Allahabad High Court
Amit Kumar vs State Of U.P. on 24 March, 2021
Bench: Virendra Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 33
Case :- BAIL No. - 1983 of 2020
Applicant :- Amit Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Prasa Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Virendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
The instant application has been filed for bail of Amit Kumar, involved in Case Crime No.356 of 2017, under Section 302 IPC., Police Station Mohammadi, District Khiri.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that in the FIR, it has been specifically mentioned that the applicant along with two real brothers and father caused injury to the deceased by spade and banka. Learned counsel further submits that in FIR, no specific role has been assigned to the applicant to cause injury to the deceased by any specific weapon whereas during investigation, for the first time, it has been stated by the prosecution witness that the applicant had caused injury to deceased by spade. Learned counsel further submits that although in FIR, four accused persons were named for causing injury to deceased by spade and banka but during investigation, the involvement of co-accused Ramesh and Vimlesh were not found and they were exonerated by the Investigating Officer. Learned counsel further submits that co-accused Vinay has already been bailed out by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.03.2019 passed in Bail No.1204 of 2018 (Vinay Kumar vs. State). Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is a law abiding person, having no criminal history, is languishing in jail since 09.07.2017. Learned counsel further submits that if the applicant is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty granted by this Court.
Learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. Learned AGA further submits that specific role has been assigned to the applicant for causing fatal injury by spade to deceased and in view of gravity of offence, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.
From perusal of record, it transpires that deceased had entered into love marriage with one Roli, sister of applicant and due to which the applicant and his family members were annoyed with the deceased. It has been alleged in FIR that on 09.07.2017, at about 8:30 p.m. the deceased Lala Pasi was going to answer the nature's call in the outskirts of the village and when he was on the way, the applicant, his brother Vimlesh, Vinay and his father Ramesh caught the deceased and caused death by spade and banka. It has further been alleged that the said occurrence was witnessed by the informant Munni Devi, mother of the deceased and so many persons.
From perusal of FIR, it transpires that no specific role has been assigned either to the applicant or any other co-accused and in FIR the presence of any witness has also not been shown.
Looking into the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, material available on record regarding role of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the bail application is liable to be allowed.
The application for bail is allowed.
Let the applicant Amit Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-
i. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii. The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witness.
iii. 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.
iv. The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
v. 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 CrPC (iv) argument / judgment.
vi. 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.
Order Date :- 24.3.2021
P.s.
