# Indrapal v. State of U.P - **Citation:** (2022) 2 ILRA 7 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2022-01-25 - **Case number:** Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3069 of 2021 - **Bench:** Vikas Kunvar Srivastav - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/indrapal-v-state-of-u-p-48149 - **Pages:** 4 ## Headnote G.A. A. Bail - The Court enlarged the applicant on bail while keeping in mind the fundamental principle is not to disbelieve a person to be innocent unless held guilty and if he is not arraigned with the charge of an offence for which the law has put on him a reverse burden of proving his innocence. (Para 11) Bail Application Allowed. (E-10) List of Cases cited: ## Text 2 All. Indrapal Vs. State of U.P. 7 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. ---------- (2022)02ILR A7 ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL SIDE DATED: LUCKNOW 25.01.2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE VIKAS KUNVAR SRIVASTAV, J. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3069 of 2021 Indrapal ...Applicant Versus State of U.P. ...Opposite Party Counsel for the Applicant: Amar Nath Dubey, Sanjay Kumar Counsel for the Opposite Party: G.A. A. Bail - The Court enlarged the applicant on bail while keeping in mind the fundamental principle is not to disbelieve a person to be innocent unless held guilty and if he is not arraigned with the charge of an offence for which the law has put on him a reverse burden of proving his innocence. (Para 11) Bail Application Allowed. (E-10) List of Cases cited: 1. Prahlad Singh Bhati Vs NCT, Delhi & anr. 2001 4 SCC 280 2. Dataram Singh Vs St. of U.P. & ors. (2018) 3 SCC 22 (Delivered by Hon'ble Vikas Kunvar Srivastav, J.) 1. The case is called out. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant Sri Amar Nath Dubey, Advocate and learned A.G.A. for the State Sri Raveesh Chandra Mishra through video conferencing and perused the record. 3. The present bail application is filed on behalf of the accused-applicant involved in Case Crime No.296 of of 2020 under Sections 302, 307, 324, 109, 120-B, 34 I.P.C., Police Station - Raniganj, District- Pratapgarh. 4. The occasion of present bail application arisen on rejection of bail plea of applicant by learned court of Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh vide order dated 12.1.2021. 5. According to the prosecution story a First Information Report lodged by a constable of Police Station Raniganj, Pratapgarh with regard to an incident taken place on 13.6.2020 when a police party containing Constable Shubham Kharwar and Head Constable Satish Mishra brought the accused-applicant in their custody in the police station and said the accused applicant Indrapal to sit there and wait for further action. Meanwhile, another police party brought the deceased Mithailal Pal and his opponents in their custody and they also made the accused persons in their custody to sit there for further action. It is 8 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES reported that the accused-applicant Indrapal suddenly picked up a spade kept in a corner of the Police Station for cleaning purposes and made a fatal blow on the deceased, 'Mithailal Pal' consequent upon which he suffered serious injuries and brought to the Swaroop Rani Medical College, Prayagraj and thereafter to Shakuntala Nursing Home, Prayagraj where he died. According to the First Information Report the offender of the incident is Indrapal and in result of his offence the deceased Mithailal Pal died on. 6. Learned counsel for the bail applicant drew attention toward several facts:- (i) The First Information Report reveals that the spade was snatched from the hands of Indrapal in the course of incident dated 13.6.2020 at about 2:00 a.m. when he made a fatal blow on the Mithailal Pal. (ii) To the contrary of the above fact extract of the case diary made Annexure No.7 to the supporting affidavit of the application reveals that the spade used in the offence by Indrapal was recovered on 13.6.2020, hidden below a quilt used by the accused-applicant, Indrapal in the lockup. (iii) After the arrest and having been committed to the accused-applicant Indrapal to prison, the jail superintendent vide letter dated 4.1.2021 was informed by the Director/Chief Superintendent of Mental Hospital, Varanasi that he is undergoing treatment for mental disease since 26.12.2020 (Annexure No.11 to the application). (iv) Learned counsel for the applicant lastly drew attention towards the Annexure No.8, a report wherein the Supervisor of Shakuntala Hospital, Civil Lines, Prayagraj reveals, on 13.6.2020 at about 22:30 p.m. in the night, the aforesaid Mithailal Pal was brought in the hospital in severely wounded condition sustained in his family dispute and violent fracas therein, though kept in the treatment but at 7:00 p.m. he died on. 7. As such, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the prosecution story is not constant and stagnant on a single prosecutions story with regard to the death of Mithailal Pal, firstly about the sudden violent attack by the present accused applicant upon Mithailal who was brought on the Police Station Raniganj in another case with which the present accused applicant who was brought by another police party in some other case had no concern with his family dispute of the deceased alongwith his opponents, secondly, the recovery of weapon of killing Mithailal Pal i.e., Spade (Fawda) is doubtful, thirdly, the First Information Report of death occurred in Shakuntala Hospital, Prayagraj in the course of treatment on 13.6.2020. The story is narrated that Mithailal Pal was seriously wounded in a violent fracas by reason of a family dispute. Moreover, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in the absence of any prima facie case specifically against the accused-applicant, he cannot be kept in the prison for time infinite as he is in jail since 14.6.2020. 8. Learned A.G.A. in protest of the bail application submitted that the accused applicant was seen on the spot of incident, his presence on the spot of incident is admitted and the witnesses have seen him blowing the fatal blow of spade on Mithailal Pal (deceased). Moreover, the post-mortem report has also verified the death of Mithailal Pal by reason of the injuries caused by sharp edged weapon. 2 All. Indrapal Vs. State of U.P. 9 9. Learned counsel for the bail applicant submitted that the present accused-applicant has no criminal antecedent and is a common man from the facts and circumstances emerging out of the prosecution case, there is a doubt with regard to the commission of crime committed by present accused-applicant personally and there is no satisfactory evidence on record as to the involvement and role in causing death of Mithailal Pal. There is no motive setforth on the part of present accused-applicant nor he was connected with any dispute in the family of Mithailal Pal and his opponents. 10. In the case of Prahlad Singh Bhati Vs. NCT, Delhi and another- (2001 4 SCC 280), Hon'ble the Supreme Court has held some parameters for grant of bail, which are being quoted hereunder:- "8. The jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of wellsettled principles having regard to the circumstances of each case and not in an arbitrary manner. While granting the bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character, behaviour, means and standing of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public or State and similar other considerations. It has also to be kept in mind that for the purposes of granting the bail the legislature has used the words "reasonable grounds for believing" instead of "the evidence" which means the court dealing with the grant of bail can only satisfy it (sic itself) as to whether there is a genuine case against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt." 11. Keeping into mind the valuable right of personal liberty and the fundamental principle not to disbelieve a person to be innocent unless held guilty and if he is not arraigned with the charge of an offence for which the law has put on him a reverse burden of proving his innocence as, held in the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others reported in [(2018) 3 SCC 22], I find force in the submission of learned counsel for the accused-appellant to enlarge him on bail. 12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case available on the record, and the nature of allegations advanced by learned counsel for the parties and looking into the alleged complicity of the applicants accused in the offence, the gravity of offence, severity of punishment etc., without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. 13. Let applicant (Indrapal) involved in Case Crime No.296 of of 2020 under Sections 302, 307, 324, 109, 120-B, 34 I.P.C., Police Station - Raniganj, District- Pratapgarh be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- by two different sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, the social and economic status of whom to be verified by court below subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- 10 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES (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 their 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 misuse 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 applicants 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. ---------- (2022)02ILR A10 ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL SIDE DATED: LUCKNOW 27.01.2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE VIKAS KUNVAR SRIVASTAV, J. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12245 of 2019 Bablu Second Bail Application ...Applicant Versus State of U.P. ...Opposite Party Counsel for the Applicant: Neeta Singh Chandel Counsel for the Opposite Party: G.A. A. Bail - The applicant planned and premeditated the murder of his wife in connection with the demand of dowry. On observing the cruel nature and instinct of the applicant in case of his release on bail certainly would adversely affect the witnesses, the Court rejected the bail application of the applicant. (Para 11) Bail Application Rejected. (E-10) List of Cases cited: 1. Prahlad Singh Bhati Vs NCT, Delhi & anr. 2001 4 SCC 280 (Delivered by Hon'ble Vikas Kunvar Srivastav, J.) 1. The case is called out through video conferencing in virtual hearing. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant Ms. Neeta Singh Chandel, Advocate, learned A.G.A. for the State Sri Raveesh Chandra Mishra, Advocate through video conferencing and perused the record. 3. The present bail application is moved on behalf of the accused-applicant involved in Case Crime No. 308 of 2013, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Itaunja, District- Lucknow.