Allowed

Sillu @ Sushil v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC31 May 2018BAIL/20781/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge High Court of U.P. allowed a bail application filed by Sillu @ Sushil in a case involving murder and grievous hurt. The court found it a fit case for bail considering the applicant's lack of criminal history and the fact that co-accused had already been released on bail, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed; applicant released on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence, pressurizing witnesses, and appearing in court.

Sillu @ Sushil Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20781 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Sillu @ Sushil Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Indra Kumar Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama filed today by Sri Vivek Kumar Singh and Sri Mayank Singh, Advocate on behalf of complainant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against seven accused persons, namely, Ankit, Sandeep, Silu, Ravi, Deepak, Raju and Ramesh alleging that on 9.10.2017 accused Ankit, Sandeep and Silu armed with pistols, accused Ravi armed with knife and sword; accused Deepak & Raju armed with lathi-danda came; Ankit and Sandeep shot fire at Rituparan, he received one gun shot injury on his head and died resultantly. Silu (applicant) shot fire at Rohit who received one gun shot injury on his leg.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that case of present applicant is identical to co-accused Deepak, Raj Kumar @ Raja and Ravi @ Navdeep who have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 5.4.2018, 21.5.2018 and 15.5.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.12324 of 2018, 18898 of 2018 and 17790 of 2018. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated due to enmity. According to postmortem report, only one firearm injury was found on the body of deceased but not caused by applicant. There is general allegation against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. There is no independent witness against the applicant. He is languishing in jail since 2.11.2017 (near about seven months) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant. He admitted that applicant has no criminal history.

¶11

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the

¶12

parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶13

Let applicant Sillu @ Sushil involved in Case Crime No. 638 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 506 IPC, Police Station Mawana, District Meerut be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶14

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶17

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶18

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 31.5.2018 A. Singh

Sillu @ Sushil v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sillu @ Sushil v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satya Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Javed Vs State of U.P.

Akeel Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Sudhir Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Pardhan Alias Sanawwar Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P.