Rasanand v. State of U.P

Court No. - 76 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29935 of 2023 Applicant :- Rasanand Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Devendra Tiwari Deva Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Krishna Kant Yadav Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶1Learned A.G.A. submits that instructions have been received and has no objection in case the bail application is heard on merits.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶3It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the allegations in the first information report is it alleged that the applicant has assaulted the father of the informant, as a result of the same, he sustained injuries. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court to the injury report of injured Bhagwan Das, which is at page 39 of the paper book in which the injured has suffered three injuries. Injury no.1 is on the head, which is incised wound, injury no.2 is incised wound on the on right side hand palm bone deep and injury no.3 is multiple lacerated wound. As per the medical report, injury nos.1 and 3 are simple in nature and injury no.2 kept under observation. Subsequently, X-ray was conducted in which injury no.2 was found to be grievous in nature and fracture was found. 3A. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the injuries sustained by the injured would indicate that no offence under Section 307 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant and at best Section 324 would be made out. The applicant has no criminal history. Applicant is languishing in jail since 2.12.2022 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶4Sri Atul Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate holding brief of Sri Krishna Kant Yadav, learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail. However, he does not dispute the fact that the injury sustained by the injured on head is simple in nature and the grievous injury is on right hand.

¶5Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute factual matrix of the case. 5A. Learned AGA has not brought any fact or circumstances to indicate criminal history or antecedents of the applicant which would disentitle the applicant for Bail.

¶6It is not the case of the State that the applicant has not cooperated in the investigation or proceedings before the trial court.

¶7The principle that Bail is a rule and Jail is an exception has been well recognised by Apex Court more specifically on the touch stone of Article 21 of the Constitution. The said principle has been reiterated by the Apex Court in Satyendra Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 (10) SCC

¶51Learned AGA has not shown any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the Applicant.

¶8No material, facts or circumstances has been shown by learned AGA that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses or the accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence.

¶9It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA for the State.

¶10Learned AGA for the State has not shown any material or circumstances that the accused/applicant is not entitled to bail in larger interests of the public or State. 10A. In the present case, it is to be seen that as per the allegations in the first information report is it alleged that the applicant has assaulted the father of the informant, as a result of the same, he sustained injuries. The injury report of injured Bhagwan Das, which is at page 39 of the paper book in which the injured has suffered three injuries. Injury no.1 is on the head, which is incised wound, injury no.2 is incised wound on the on right side hand palm bone deep and injury no.3 is multiple lacerated wound. As per the medical report, injury nos.1 and 3 are simple in nature and injury no.2 kept under observation. Subsequently, X-ray was conducted in which injury no.2 was found to be grievous in nature and fracture was found. The injuries sustained by the injured would indicate that no offence under Section 307 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant and at best Section 324 would be made out. The applicant has no criminal history. Applicant is languishing in jail since 2.12.2022

¶11Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of learned counsel for the parties 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.

¶12Let the applicant Rasanand involved in S.T. No.49 of 2023, Case Crime No.461 of 2022, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 307, 504 I.P.C. and Section 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station Milak, District Rampur be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:- i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. ii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted and/or the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. v. The applicant 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 or tamper with the evidence. vi. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. vii. In the event, the applicant changes his residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing.

¶13In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 27.10.2023 Bhaskar High Court of Judicature at Allahabad