Rajendra Prasad Bhartiya v. State of U.P

Court No. - 68 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46385 of 2023 Applicant :- Rajendra Prasad Bhartiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Girja Shanker Mishra,Patgendra Bhushan Misra,Pratiksha Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶2It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that the F.I.R. dated

15.05.2023 was lodged by the complainant-Kanchan Devi, with the allegation that on 14.05.2023 at about 12:30 p.m. on account of land dispute the accused persons namely, Rajendra Prasad Bhartiya (applicant), Lavkush, Karan and Satish entered into her house and by abusing assaulted her husband with bricks, stones and sharp edged weapon, on account of which her husband sustained injuries on his head and his leg got fractured and he became unconscious, the accused persons also beaten her. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that deceased died on 04.06.2023 after 20 days of the incident and in his postmortem report two injuries were found. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of complainant including eye witnesses and other independent witnesses. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the complainant and one eye witness, namely, Nisha Bhartiya @ Chhoti in their statements recorded before the Investigating Officer have categorically stated that the applicant and his two sons, namely, Karan and Satish caught hold her husband and another son of applicant, namely, Lavkush, assaulted her husband with bricks lying there and both the witnesses have assigned the role of assaulting the deceased by kicks and fists to the applicant., thus, main role of assaulting the deceased is assigned to the co-accused, Lavkush and the case of Lavkush is distinguishable from the case of applicant. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 21.07.2023, having no criminal history.

¶3Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

¶4After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and distinguishing the case of co-accused Lavkush with the case of applicant, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view, that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶5Let applicant-Rajendra Prasad Bhartiya, involved in Case Crime No. 164 of 2023, under Sections 302, 452, 504, 506, 323, 427, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Ghoorpur, District Prayagraj, be enlarged on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶6The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail in accordance with law.

¶7The bail application is allowed. Order Date :- 2.11.2023 Mustaqeem. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad