[ad_1]
Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Ujjwal Kumar (Dead) Through Lr vs The State Of Bihar on 28 April, 2025
Author: Surya Kant
Bench: Surya Kant
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2248 OF 2025
(Arising out of SLP(Cr.)No.6381 of 2021)
UJJWAL KUMAR (DEAD) THROUGH LR … APPELLANT
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. … RESPONDENTS
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The complainant, who was an injured eye-witness, approached
this Court in 2021 challenging an order dated 27.07.2021, passed by
the High Court of Judicature at Patna, granting bail to respondent
Nos.2 and 3 (Chandeshwar Rai @ Tana Rai and Shailesh Kumar
respectively), in a case FIR No. 553 of 2020, dated 24.07.2020, for
offences under Sections 147, 148, 34, 302, 307, 323, 324 and 325 of
the IPC, registered at P.S. Sonpur, Saran, Bihar.
3. Shailesh Rai was the victim who, as per the post-mortem report
dated 24.07.2020, suffered multiple injuries resulting in his
death. The complainant - Ujjwal Kumar was also inflicted with
severe injuries in that occurrence. Counsel for the appellant says
that as per her instructions, during the pendency of these
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
proceedings, the appellant-Ujjwal Kumar also unfortunately died an
SATISH KUMAR YADAV
Date: 2025.04.30
18:18:40 IST
Reason:
unnatural death on 19.04.2022.
4. It may be mentioned that as per the prosecution’s case, the
2
deceased Shailesh Rai was assaulted with rods, farsas and lathis by
respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 and others. There are specific allegations
that respondent Nos.2 and 3 caught hold of Shailesh Rai and the
others assaulted him which resulted in his death. Respondent Nos.2
and 3 surrendered on 29.08.2020. They applied for bail which was
declined by the Sessions Court. Thereafter, they approached the
High Court and within less than one year, the High Court, vide the
impugned order dated 27.07.2021, released them on bail observing
that the investigation was complete and there was nothing to
substantiate that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 “are going to tamper with
the evidence”. According to the High Court, respondent Nos.2 and 3
were “languishing in custody” for long.
5. Upon notice in these proceedings, respondent Nos.2 and 3
could not be served. Hence, a report was obtained from the District
and Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra, Bihar, where the trial is
pending. As per the report forwarded by the District and Sessions
Judge, Saran at Chapra, Bihar, notice has not been served on
respondent Nos.2 and 3 as they are absconding. It is obvious that
they are not participating in the trial and are brazenly misusing
the concession of bail granted by the High Court. On facts also,
both the reasons assigned by the High Court are untenable. In a
case where the offence attracts life imprisonment, the custody of
an accused who has been attributed an active role in the
occurrence, for a period of less than one year cannot be termed as
unreasonably long. Similarly, the High Court ought not to have
jumped to a conclusion that respondent Nos.2 and 3 will not tamper
with the evidence. Our concern, at this stage, is as to how and in
3
what circumstances the complainant – Ujjwal Kumar, who was a
crucial witness against respondent Nos.2 and 3, has also died an
unnatural death. The facts speak for themselves. The continuation
of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 on bail is highly undesirable and they
deserve to be brought to justice by securing their presence through
lawful coercive means. Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed
with the following directions:
(i) The order dated 27.07.2021, passed by the High Court
of Judicature at Patna granting bail to respondent Nos.2
and 3 is hereby set aside.
(ii) Roaming non-bailable warrants are ordered to be
issued against respondent Nos.2 and 3 to arrest them
forthwith.
(iii) The Director General of Police, Bihar is directed to
constitute a Special Team to nab respondent Nos.2 and 3.
(iv) The agricultural land, residential house and any
other immovable assets, owned by respondent Nos.2 and 3,
are hereby attached. Except the dwelling units where the
dependent family members of respondent Nos.2 and 3 are
currently residing, all other properties are ordered to be
sealed.
(v) The Collector, Saran at Chapra, Bihar is directed to
take over physical possession of all such properties, and a
compliance report be sent to this Court within two weeks.
(vi) The witnesses, who are yet to depose, are directed
to be provided adequate protection. The Superintendent of
Police, Chapra will do the needful and submit a compliance
4
report.
(vii) The Sessions Court, before whom the trial is
pending, is directed to record the statements of all the
eye-witnesses or other vital witnesses one by one,
preferably by listing the case at least twice in a month.
The Presiding Officer of the court shall also send a
compliance report to this Court.
(viii) The Superintendent of Police, Chapra shall further
explain in the Status Report regarding arrest of respondent
Nos.2 and 3.
(ix) In case respondent Nos.2 and 3 are arrested
meanwhile and/or they surrender, the Sessions Court or the
High Court shall not release them on bail till further
orders by this Court.
(x) The Superintendent of Police, Saran at Chapra, Bihar
is further directed to assess the threat perception to the
family members of the victim and their relatives. Adequate
care shall be taken to ensure that no harm is caused to
their life, liberty and property.
.....................……....J.
(SURYA KANT)
..............……...…………....J.
(NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH)
NEW DELHI;
APRIL 28, 2025.
5
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).6381/2021
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27-07-2021
in CRM No.4082/2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
Patna]
UJJWAL KUMAR (DEAD) THROUGH LR Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. Respondent(s)
Date : 28-04-2025 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH
For Petitioner(s) Ms. Qurratulain, AOR
Mr. Saket Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Shagun Mishra, Adv.
Ms. Chaya Kirti, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Azmat Hayat Amanullah, AOR
Ms. Rebecca Mishra, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
(SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (PREETHI T.C.)
ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Signed order is placed on the file)
[ad_2]
Source link