Allahabad High Court
Jai Ram And Another vs State Of U.P. on 29 March, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 85
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12525 of 2023
Applicant :- Jai Ram And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Ram Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ravindra Prakash Srivastava
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Shri Shiv Ram Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants; Shri J.P. Yadav, holding brief of Shri R.P. Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Jai Ram and Manish, with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 78 of 2021(S.S.T. No. 1183 of 2021), under Sections 147,148,149,323,504,354A,452,342,325,308 IPC Police Station Kalwari, District- Basti, during pendency of trial.
Submission is that there are cross versions of the incident registered by both the parties. Injuries have been caused to both the parties. It cannot be ascertained at this stage which party was the aggressor.The applicants are in jail since 21.02.2022 and have no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
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; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the 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; 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 applicants be released on bail on their 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.
1. The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicants shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
4. That the applicants 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;
5. The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.
6. The applicants 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 29.3.2023
Atul kr. sri.
