Allahabad High Court
Chandrakesh @ Lalji @ Dhamali vs State Of U.P. on 19 December, 2023
Author: Siddharth
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:240672
Reserved on 12.12.2023
Delivered on 19.12.2023
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7088 of 2022
Applicant :- Chandrakesh @ Lalji @ Dhamali
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Prakash Chandra Srivastava,Amaresh Yadava,Raj Kishor Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amit Kumar Yadav,Karunesh Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Raj Kishor Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Karunesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
There is allegation in the FIR that the applicant is the collateral of the informant whose father had died two months ago on account of illness Applicant had suspicion that his father had died due to exorcism done by Harnarayan Yadav. Hence, applicant and the co-accused Sailesh and Surendra, were implicated in this case on the allegation that all are them murdered father of the informant by cutting his neck by sharp edged weapon.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the second statement of the informant he has developed prosecution story and hence stated that at the time of incident he was going with his sister and saw the applicant assaulting his father by knife. He further stated that on the pointing of the applicant and co-accused Ram Nath, the blood stained knife and t-shirt were recovered. It has been stated that the incident took place near the house of Gulab Yadav, Raj Narayan Yadav and Rajendra Yadav, but their houses are not shown in the site plan nor their statements were recorded. Applicant has been implicated on the basis of suspicion. Nothing incriminating was recovered from him. He is in jail since 26.07.2021.
Before the trial court statements of P.W.-I and P.W-II have been recorded. They have made allegations against one, Ram Nath, whose name was not mentioned in the first information report. He has submitted that recovery of knife and t-shirt have been allegedly recovered from co-accused, Ram Nath and not from the applicant. In the first information report general role was assigned to all the persons and there is no specific role assigned to the applicant. Co-accused, Ram Nath, has been granted bail by this Court vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6665 of 2022 on 05.07.2022. Co-accused, Shailesh Yadav and Surendra Yadav have also been enlarged on bail vide bail applications Nos. 40614 of 2021 and 41463 of 2022.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Chandrakesh @ Lalji @ Dhamali, involved in Case Crime No.272 of 2021, under Sections 302, 504 and 506 I.P.C, Police Station Jhagaha, District- Gorakhpur 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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 him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(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 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.
Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 19.12.2023
SS
