Shrikeshan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko U.P

Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1574 of 2023 Applicant :- Shrikeshan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anuj Dayal,Divya Prakash,Manish Srivastava,Mohammad Salim Khan,Mohd. Shahid Akhtar,Pankaj Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Madhusudan Dutt Mishra Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶1Case called out. None appeared on behalf of the complainant.

¶2Heard Mohammad Shahid Akhtar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Avishesh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶3The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.0312 of 2022 under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 302, 504, 506, 307,34 IPC and Section 7 CAL Act, Police Station Maholi District Sitapur.

¶4It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the FIR, there was dispute between the parties with respect to irrigation of field. The FIR further indicates that quarrel had taken place and the applicant and co-accused were aggressor Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the role of firing is assigned to co-accused Kallu Yadav and Mulayam Yadav and the deceased died due to fire arm injuries.The postmortem report indicates that the deceased received two fire arm injuries.Learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that applicant and other co-accused person have been assigned the role of assault with Lathi to other three injured,namely, Amit, Sandeep and Shivram. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that other injured had received injuries and the FIR indicates that general allegation of assault has been levelled to all the six accused and no specific role has been assigned. He further submitted that at the most case against the applicant is within the purview of section 307 IPC. The applicant is in jail since

30.06.2022.

¶5On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there are injured persons and the allegation is levelled to the extent that the applicant assaulted the injured persons with Lathi,therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.

¶6Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and after hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking into overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as the argument that general allegation of assault has been levelled to all the six co-accused persons and the deceased died due to fire arms injuries which is said to have been caused by co-accused Kallu Yadav and Mulayam Yadav and the case of the applicant is distinguishable with co-accused Kallu Yadav and Mulayam Yadav, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.

¶7Let the applicant, namely, Shrikeshan, be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

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

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii) 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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The Trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything in this order. Order Date :- 30.11.2023 dk/ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench