Kundan Singh v. State of U.P

Court No. - 76 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46305 of 2023 Applicant :- Kundan Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arti Bhatt Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶1Learned A.G.A. for the State 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 First Information Report it is alleged that the nominated accused persons have assaulted the informant. Thereafter specific role has been assigned to the applicant of causing injury by axe on Naima Devi. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court to page no. 33 of the paper book which are injury report of Naima Devi where injury no. 1 is lacerated wound and injury no. 2 is a traumatic swelling. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that injury nos. 1 and 2 have been caused by hard and blunt object. Learned counsel for the applicant has further drawn attention of this Court to the statement of the Doctor which is at page no. 50 of the paper book where the Doctor has stated that injured, Naima Devi has suffered 12 stitches on the face and there was a fracture in the right wrist. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the injuries were grievous in nature, however, no statement has been made that the injuries were life threatening. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that injury of the informant are grievous in nature. The applicant has no criminal history. Applicant is languishing in jail since 16.09.2023 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶4Sri Shailesh Pandey, learned counsel holding brief of Smt. Arti Bhatt, learned counsel for the informant submits that injured has suffered injuries and 12 stitches have been found and there was a fracture in the wrist. On a pointed query being made to learned counsel for the informant as to whether the injuries were found to be life threatening, learned counsel for the informant submits that as per the supplementary report injuries were grievous in nature. 4-A. Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute factual matrix of the case.

¶5Learned AGA for the State 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 for the State 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 for the State 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. 10-A. It is to be seen that in the present case the assault on injured, Naima Devi, has been made against the applicant. The injured, Naima Devi, has suffered grievous injury which have been caused by hard and blunt object. Injury no. 1 is lacerated wound muscle deep on the right side of the face. Injury no. 2 is traumatic swelling. It is further to be noted that as per the Doctor the injuries are grievous in nature, however, it has not been stated that the injuries were life threatening. The injuries being caused by hard and blunt object is indicative of the fact that despite the allegation of weapon of assault is axe, the Doctor has stated in the supplementary report that injuries have been caused by hard and blunt object which indicative of the fact that the applicant has no intention to commit culpable homicide.

¶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-Kundan Singh involved in Case Crime No. 121 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 452, 325, 326, 323, 307, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Pinahat, District Agra 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 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 :- 22.11.2023 VMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad