Allahabad High Court
Gyan Prakash vs State Of U.P. on 20 October, 2022
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44499 of 2022
Applicant :- Gyan Prakash
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record.
2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.229 of 2022, under Section 304 IPC, registered at Police Station Akrabad, District Aligarh.
3. As per contents of FIR, the incident is said to have taken place on 13.06.2022 when the brother of deceased Ravi Nayak is said to have been going somewhere on his motorcycle alongwith his wife when suddenly a mob including the applicant and co-accused are said to have chased the deceased and beaten him on the allegation of being a thief. It is stated that the deceased suffered grievous injury due to which he subsequently passed away.
4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him and in fact an FIR registered as Case Crime No.227 of 2022 was filed against the deceased under Section 392 IPC by one Renu alleging that the deceased alongwith another person named Ashok Kumar had snatched her mobile and chain while they were going past her on a motorcycle. Said FIR states that upon her shouting for help, the locals caught hold of the person who identified himself as the deceased. It is submitted that it was on account of the incident indicated in aforesaid FIR that the deceased was caught by locals on the allegation of being chain snatcher and was beaten up leading to his injuries and subsequent death. It is submitted that the applicant has been introduced only on the basis of statement of one Jay Singh without any indication as to how the applicant was particularly recognized or identified from the mob. It is submitted that except for the statement of said Jay Singh, there is no other evidence against the applicant of having been involved in the alleged crime. The applicant is in jail since 15.06.2022 and as yet only a charge-sheet has been filed.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State has opposed the bail application with the submission that the applicant was directly identified by a local person namely Jay Singh on the basis of which he has been apprehended.
6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :-
"21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty."
"27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."
7. Considering the submission advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material available on record, it appears that an FIR had already been registered against the deceased by one Renu with the allegation that the deceased snatched away her mobile and chain and was thereafter caught hold by the locals and passed away after ill-treatment. Co-accused and deceased are said to have escaped from the spot. At this stage, it appears that applicant has been apprehended only on the basis statement of one Jay Singh and even otherwise does not indicate as to how the applicant was particularly recognized in the mob. The applicant is in jail since 15.06.2022 and as yet only charge-sheet has been filed.
8. Looking to the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant and submission made in the bail application, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, particularly since no reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses has been alleged, prima facie, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
9. Accordingly bail application is allowed.
10. Let applicant, Gyan Prakash, involved in the aforesaid case 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) 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.
(ii) 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.
(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 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. 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 :- 20.10.2022
Subodh/-
