LexGIRRAJ versus KIRANPAL AND ANR ETC
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B C D E F G H 229 GIRRAJ v. KIRANPAL AND ANR ETC (Criminal Appeal Nos. 286-290 of 2021) MARCH 08, 2021 [DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND M. R. SHAH, JJ.] Bail: Grant of bail – By High Court – To the five respondent-accused charged under provisions of IPC and Arms Act – On the ground of parity with the co-accused who was already granted bail by the High Court – Appeal to Supreme Court seeking cancellation of bail – Held: The bail granted by High Court to the co-accused was cancelled by Supreme Court – Since the bail granted to the present respondent-accused was on the ground of parity, their bail also liable to be cancelled – However, the respondents are granted one more opportunity to apply for bail before High Court, subject to their surrendering pursuant to the present order cancelling their bail. Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1. Ex facie, the orders of the High Court would indicate that the only basis for claiming bail in the present batch of cases was by placing reliance on the order granting bail to the co-accused. Since bail has been granted to all the respondent- accused who have claimed parity on the basis of the order granting bail to the co-accused, there can be no manner of doubt that the cancellation of bail by this Court that was granted to the co-accused by High Court, must have a similar consequence insofar as the grant of bail to the remaining five accused is concerned. The orders passed by the High Court granting bail to the five respondent-accused shall stand cancelled. [Paras 14, 18(i)][236- A-B; 237-B-C] Panchanan Mishra vs. Digambar Mishra (2005) 3 SCC 143 : [2005] 1 SCR 484 – referred to. [2021] 2 S.C.R. 229 229 A B C D E F G H 230 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 2 S.C.R. 2. Nonetheless, in order to ensure fairness to the co- accused, who are the respondents in these proceedings, it would be appropriate to furnish them an opportunity to apply for bail before the High Court, conditional on their surrendering in pursuance of the present order cancelling their bail. [Para 18] [237-A-B] Case Law Reference [2005] 1 SCR 484 referred to Para 12 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal Nos. 286-290 of 2021 From the Judgment and Order dated 17.09.2020 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 22538 of 2020, Final Impugned order dated 22.09.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15449, 14816, 14951, 15255 of 2020 Rajiv Garg, T. L. Garg, Advs. for the Appellant. Vinod Diwakar, AAG., Rajul Bhargava, Sr. Adv., Sarvesh Singh Baghel, Sandeep Singh, B.N. Dubey, Ms. Shivranjani Ralawata, Kartikeya Bhargava, Advs. for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, J. 1. Permission to file the Special Leave Petitions granted. 2. Leave granted. 3. A batch of five Special Leave Petitions (SLP) under Article 136 of the Constitution has arisen from the orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad granting bail to the five respondent- accused, namely: (i) Kiranpal; (ii) Sundar; (iii) Rakesh; (iv) Satish; and (v) Dharmendra. A B C D E F G H 231 4. The circumstances which have led to the registration of the first information report1 being Case Crime No 414 of 2019 against the accused under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 342 and 508 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Rabupura, District Gautam Budh Nagar may be adverted to briefly. The appellant who is the original complainant had two sons, Gajendra aged 34 years and Akash aged 22 years, who were killed in the course of an incident which took place on 29 November 2019. Two other persons, Sunil and Jeetu, out of the four others present along with the deceased, are alleged to have been seriously injured in the course of the incident. The FIR was lodged on 30 November 2019 at 1743 hours against eight accused persons, five of which are before this Court in these proceedings. The FIR refers to the fact that there was an enmity between the accused and the complainant and his sons due to “party politics”. The FIR mentions an earlier incident on 24 October 2019, when five of the accused (Sundar, Dharmendra, Monu, Kiranpal and Ompal) had attacked Akash at Chambe in Mirzapur with an intent to kill him. Akash had allegedly sustained a head injury after being assaulted with an iron rod and a fire-arm injury in respect of which a first information report was lodged. Two of the accused (Rakesh and Satish) had also allegedly assaulted th
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.