Allahabad High Court
Suresh Soni And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Home Secy. Lko. on 20 September, 2023
Bench: Mohd. Faiz Khan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:60608
Court No. - 14
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14565 of 2022
Applicant :- Suresh Soni And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Home Secy. Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Bhola Singh Patel,Anand Kanaujia,Anjani Kumar Mishra,Ashish Kumar Rastogi,Manoj Kumar Singh,Nadeem Murtaza,Pravin Kumar Verma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
1. Heard Shri Nadeem Murtaza, learned counsel for the accused/applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicants- Suresh Soni and Mithun Soni for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 239/2022, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station Dewa, District Barabanki, during trial.
3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicants while pressing the bail application submits that the accused-applicants have falsely been implicated in the instant case and they have not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.
4. It is further submitted that allegations against the applicants are to the tune that the applicant no.1- Suresh Soni had lodged an FIR against the deceased bearing Case Crime No. 345 of 2014under Section 307 IPC 3/25 Arms Act, wherein the applicant no.2 Mithun Soni was injured and they had taken Rs. 5,00,000/- from the deceased(accused person of that case) for the purpose of compromise, however, even after taking money they refused to compromise whereby the deceased (accused) feels aggrieved and committed suicide.
5. Highlighting the above fact, it is vehemently submitted that to constitute an offence under Section 306 IPC there has to be a direct nexus between the commission of suicide and any act and omission of the accused person. Lodging a First Information Report wherein after investigation charge sheet has also been filed and in absence of any observation or any judgment of the trial court the prosecution of the deceased by the applicants may not be termed as malicious and by any stretch of imagination the same may also not been termed as abetment as defined under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code.
6. It is also submitted that there is no evidence or material with regard to taking of Rs. 5,00,000/- by the applicant as this huge amount may not be given in cash and and even if the cash is taken the same might have been withdrawn from some Bank and in absence of any such evidence the allegation as levelled in the suicide note of the deceased appears to be based on malafide.
7. It is further submitted that the applicants are in jail in this case since 17.9.2022. The applicant no.1 is not having any criminal antecedent. The applicant no.2 is having criminal history of one case which has been explained in paragraph 4 of the Supplementary Rejoinder Affidavit dated 19.7.2023 and there is no apprehension that the accused-applicants after release on bail, may flee from the process of law or will misuse the liberty of bail.
8 Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that the applicants are the accused of committing heinous offence, therefore they are not entitled to be released on bail.
9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that the allegations in the First Information Report as well as in the suicide note, allegedly written by the deceased, are to the tune that a criminal case was lodged by the applicant no.1, wherein the deceased shown accused of assaulting the applicant no.2, who has sustained firearm injury. The trial of the said case is pending as the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge sheet. The accused person of that case (deceased) is stated to have given Rs. 5,00,000/- to the applicant for the purpose of making compromise. It is submitted with considerable force by learned counsel for the applicants that there is no evidence/ material with regard to the transaction pertaining to Rs. 5,00,000/-. it is also submitted that the prosecuting a case wherein injured person has sustained firearm injury may not be termed as abetment as defined under Section 107 of I.P.C. The applicants are in jail in this case since 17.9.2022. The applicant no.1 is not having any criminal history and criminal history of one case of applicant no.2 has been explained sufficiently in paragraph 4 of supplementary rejoinder affidavit. Their presence may be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions.
6. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
7. Let the applicants-Suresh Soni and Mithun Soni involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
(ii) The applicants shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
9. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicants and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
10. Observations made herein-above are only for the purpose of disposal of bail application and the same shall not have any bearing on the trial of the case.
Order Date :- 20.9.2023
Muk
