Accused persons are entitled to bail even for serious offenses unless the prosecution can show that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the accused will abscond or will otherwise misuse their liberty.

Court No. - 91

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41500

of 2021

Applicant :- Rohan And 2 Others

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Shukla

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

Heard Sri Rohit Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants as

well as learned AGA for the State appearing through Video

Conferencing and perused the material placed on record.

By means of the present bail application, the applicants-Rohan,

Umesh and Lallo seek bail in Case Crime No.716 of 2017,

under Sections 323, 324, 325, 504, 506, 308 of IPC, Police

Station- Chhata, District- Mathura, during the pendency of trial.

As per the prosecution story, the Informant lodged an NCR

against the applicants under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC on

03.11.2017 at 11:30 PM alleging therein that the applicants

along with one Digamber are said to have assaulted their uncle

Sitaram. The said NCR was converted into an FIR which was

registered as Case Crime No.716 of 2017, under Sections 323,

324, 325, 504 and 506 IPC. The applicants along with co-

accused Digamber were released on bail in Case Crime No. 716

of 2017, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 504, 506 IPC vide order

dated 12.12.2017 passed by In-charge Judicial Magistrate,

Chhata, Mathura.

Learned counsel for the applicants drew the attention of the

Court to Annexure-6 which is the CT Scan report of the injured

Pawan son of Radha Krishan wherein fracture on right parietal

bone is seen. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

applicants that the said report of CT Scan was conducted on

05.01.2018 with the delay of about two months from the date of

occurrence. On the basis of said report of CT Scan, section 308

IPC was added against the applicants and, therefore, the

applicants applied for bail including the sections 323, 324, 325,

504 and 506 IPC in which they were already enlarged on bail

by the court below. The applicants are also entitled to bail on

the ground that they were already on bail in the said crime

number. The Court could have continued with the said order

dated 12.12.2017. The applicants may be released and the

previous sureties may be allowed to be applicable in the added

section of 308 IPC as well. There are no criminal antecedents of

the applicants. The applicants are languishing in jail since

10.08.2021 and they deserve to be released on bail in all the

sections including the subsequently added section. In case, the

applicants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty

of bail and shall cooperate with the trial.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the

applicants but he has not disputed the fact that the applicants

have no criminal history. He has further argued that the

applicants has failed to elucidate as to whether they have

misused the bail granted earlier or not.

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record

regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the

Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex

Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and

another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 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.

Let the applicants- Rohan, Umesh and Lallo, who are involved

in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on their

furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like

amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to

following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order,

the sureties be verified.

(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they

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