- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Malkhan Singh v. State Of U.P.
Factual and Procedural Background
The applicant, accused in Case Crime No. 37 of 2019 under Sections 34, 147, 148, 149, 302, 120-B I.P.C., at Police Station Jagdishpur, District Amethi, is seeking bail. The alleged incident occurred on 07.02.2019. The applicant has been in custody since 12.03.2019. The applicant contends that he has been falsely implicated, no recovery has been made from him, and no specific role has been assigned to him in the commission of the crime. The statement of an independent witness was recorded 52 days after the incident. The applicant has no prior criminal record.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the charges and the evidence presented.
- What conditions should be imposed on the applicant if bail is granted to ensure the integrity of the trial process.
Arguments of the Parties
Applicant's Arguments
- The applicant has been falsely implicated in the case.
- The incident occurred on 07.02.2019, but the statement of an independent witness was recorded after 52 days, raising questions on the evidence.
- No recovery or specific role has been attributed to the applicant in the alleged crime.
- The applicant has been in jail since 12.03.2019 without any prior criminal history.
- There is no risk of the applicant fleeing or tampering with witnesses.
- The applicant undertakes not to misuse the liberty of bail if granted.
Respondent's Arguments
- The learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application but did not dispute the factual assertions made by the applicant’s counsel.
Table of Precedents Cited
No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits, considered the nature of the accusation, the severity of punishment if convicted, and the supporting evidence. Despite reasonable apprehension of witness tampering and prima facie satisfaction supporting the charge, the Court found the applicant entitled to bail. The Court imposed specific conditions on bail to safeguard the trial process, including the applicant’s presence at critical trial stages, prohibition on seeking unnecessary adjournments, and consequences for misuse of bail liberty.
Holding and Implications
The applicant is granted bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court, along with specified conditions.
The decision allows the applicant temporary liberty while ensuring judicial oversight and safeguards against abuse of bail. No new precedent was established; the ruling applies directly to the facts and circumstances of the present case.
Rekha Dikshit, J.:— Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that accused applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the alleged incident took place on 07.02.2019 and statement of independent witness Narendra Dev Upadhyay was recorded after a span of 52 days. It is also submitted that there is no recovery from the applicant, which may lead towards his involvement in the commission of alleged crime. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since 12.03.2019. It is next submitted that the applicant is neither a previous convict nor he has any criminal history. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
3. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
4. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
5. Let the applicant involved in Case Crime No. 37 of 2019, under Sections 34, 147, 148, 149, 302, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Jagdishpur, District Amethi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:—
(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 Penal Code, 1860.
(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 Penal Code, 1860.
(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.
Alert