The Allahabad High Court has granted conditional bail to Ankur Mishra, who is accused of murdering a six-year-old child by throwing him into a well in Hulka village under Meja police station area of Prayagraj.
A Single Bench of Justice Siddharth passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Ankur Mishra.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Ankur Mishra, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case under Sections 363, 302, 120B of IPC, Police Station Meja, District Prayagraj, during pendency of trial.
There is allegation in the FIR regarding missing of the son of the informant aged about 6 years from 05:15 pm on 18.10.2021. It has further been stated in the FIR that the missing child wears spectacles and he is student of VR Public School.
Subsequently, on the basis of confessional statement of the applicant and other accused recorded on 19.10.2021, admitting that the applicant and co-accused took the missing son of the informant to the well and pushed him inside, the implication of applicant and other accused was made.
Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the well in dispute did not had any boundary. The child of the informant was playing cricket with the children and accidentally fell down in the well. He suffered injuries by falling on the pumping set inside the well and because of enmity between the families of both the parties the applicant was falsely implicated in this case. The parties appear to be neighbours.
Counsel for applicant has further submitted that the witness, Rajeshwar Chaubey, had testified to the fact that he saw the dead body of the deceased and if deceased appeared to have suffered head injuries because of falling on the pumping set installed inside the well. Before the trial court dates are being fixed for prosecution evidence which is not coming forth. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 19.10.2021. The trial in the aforesaid case is not likely to be concluded in near future.
AGA and Senior counsel have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant and submitted that it is not a case of accident, but murder of the only child of his parents aged about 6 years. They have submitted that keeping in view the gravity of the crime alleged against the applicant he is not entitled to enlarge on bail. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
“Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs CBI & Another, passed in SLP (Crl) judgement dated 11.7.2022 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,” the Court observed.
The Court ordered that,
Let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime 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 that:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 CrPC is issued and the applicants fail 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.
(v) 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 CrPC. 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.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The post appeared first on .
A Single Bench of Justice Siddharth passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Ankur Mishra.
The bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Ankur Mishra, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case under Sections 363, 302, 120B of IPC, Police Station Meja, District Prayagraj, during pendency of trial.
There is allegation in the FIR regarding missing of the son of the informant aged about 6 years from 05:15 pm on 18.10.2021. It has further been stated in the FIR that the missing child wears spectacles and he is student of VR Public School.
Subsequently, on the basis of confessional statement of the applicant and other accused recorded on 19.10.2021, admitting that the applicant and co-accused took the missing son of the informant to the well and pushed him inside, the implication of applicant and other accused was made.
Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the well in dispute did not had any boundary. The child of the informant was playing cricket with the children and accidentally fell down in the well. He suffered injuries by falling on the pumping set inside the well and because of enmity between the families of both the parties the applicant was falsely implicated in this case. The parties appear to be neighbours.
Counsel for applicant has further submitted that the witness, Rajeshwar Chaubey, had testified to the fact that he saw the dead body of the deceased and if deceased appeared to have suffered head injuries because of falling on the pumping set installed inside the well. Before the trial court dates are being fixed for prosecution evidence which is not coming forth. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 19.10.2021. The trial in the aforesaid case is not likely to be concluded in near future.
AGA and Senior counsel have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant and submitted that it is not a case of accident, but murder of the only child of his parents aged about 6 years. They have submitted that keeping in view the gravity of the crime alleged against the applicant he is not entitled to enlarge on bail. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
“Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs CBI & Another, passed in SLP (Crl) judgement dated 11.7.2022 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,” the Court observed.
The Court ordered that,
Let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime 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 that:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 CrPC is issued and the applicants fail 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.
(v) 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 CrPC. 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.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The post appeared first on .