Allowed

Beni Ram v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Nov 2018BAIL/301/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to Beni Ram, an accused alleged of causing death by assault under IPC offences. The court noted contradictions between prosecution and medical evidence, lack of independent witnesses, and the applicant's clean record, finding it a fit case for bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses.

Beni Ram Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 301 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Beni Ram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Devashish Mitra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

According to prosecution case, the N.C.R. was lodged against two accused persons, namely Beni Ram and Guddu alleging that on 6.9.2017 they assaulted Ganga Dayal by lathies and dandas and resultantly he died on 15.9.2017 after nine days of the incident.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail sine 21.9.2017 (more than one year and two months); having no criminal history; the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to previous enmity. According to F.I.R. as well as statement of deceased and son of the deceased, injury was caused by blunt object. According to postmortem report, incised wound 5 x 0.5 cm. No fracture was found; general role has been assigned to all the accused; only one injury was found on the body of the injured; it is not ascertained who is the author of the injury; there is major contradiction between the oral evidence and medical evidence; there is no independent witness and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

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

¶10

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the 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.

¶11

Let the applicant Beni Ram involved in Case Crime No. 830 of 2017, under Section 304, 323, 324, 504 IPC, Police StationHafizganj, District-Bareilly be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the

¶12

satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶13

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

¶14

2.The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

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

¶16

4.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.

¶17

5.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.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 26.11.2018 OP

Beni Ram v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Beni Ram 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

Sonu Chaudhary Vs State of U.P.

Veerpal Vs State of U.P.

Vishram Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sanjeev Vs State of U.P.

Anil Kumar @ Babali Shivhare Vs State of U.P.

Fula Devi Vs State of U.P.