Pappu v. State of U.P

Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48568 of 2023 Applicant :- Pappu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Janardan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶1Sri F.A. Alvi, Advocate, filed his power today on behalf of the informant, which is taken on record.

¶2Heard Sri Janardan Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri F.A. Alvi, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Shatrughna Yadav, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶3The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 360 of 2023, under Sections 323, 302, 504, 506, 307, 308, 34 IPC, Police Station-Nizamabad, District-Azamgarh, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶4FIR of the present case was lodged against applicant and six others under Sections 323, 504, 506, 307,308, 34 IPC and according to the FIR, on 14.08.2023 at about 5:00 p.m. applicant and other accused persons made assault upon husband of the informant though lathi danda and spade and due to assault made by them, her husband sustained injury on his head and fainted and when informant tried to save him then they also made assault upon her and due to that she sustained injury on her leg.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that entire allegation made against the applicant is totally false and baseless and only general and omnibus allegation has been levelled in the FIR and in the statements of the witnesses including informant. He further submitted that post mortem report of the deceased suggests that he sustained six injuries but only two injuries were on his head and there is no evidence on record, which can show that applicant is the author of these two injuries and according to the doctor, deceased died due to head injury.

¶6He further submitted that co-accused Dhunnu has been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court today i.e. on 09.11.2023 and case of applicant is at par with him.

¶7He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 17.08.2023.

¶8Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant although, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that co-accused Dhannu has been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court and case is applicant is at par with him.

¶9I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶10From the record, it reflects that on the basis of general allegation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter alongwith six others and although, deceased sustained six injuries but he died due to head injury and post-mortem report of the deceased suggests that he sustained two injuries on his head and there is no evidence on record, which can show that applicant is the person, who caused these injuries to the deceased.

¶11Further, bail application of co-accused Dhunnu has been allowed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 48531 of 2023 and case of applicant is at par with him.

¶12The Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. CBI & another (2022) 10 SCC 51 in paragraph no. 98 has observed that-Uniformity and certainty in the decisions of the court are the foundations of judicial dispensation. Persons accused with same offence shall never be treated differently either by the same court or by the same or different courts. Such an action though by an exercise of discretion despite being a judicial one would be a grave affront to Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India.

¶13Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, particularly the fact that co-accused Dhunnu has been released on bail and case of applicant is at par with him, in my view applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity itself.

¶14Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶15Let the applicant-Pappu be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶16In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶17It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 9.11.2023 KK Patel High Court of Judicature at Allahabad