Allowed

Bhupandra Pal @ Chootu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2018BAIL/4131/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court criminal miscellaneous bail application was heard by Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh, J. The court granted bail to the applicant, Bhupandra Pal alias Chootu, involved in a case under Sections 379, 411, 414, and 420 IPC.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to the applicant on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Bhupandra Pal @ Chootu Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4131 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Bhupandra Pal @ Chootu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Digvijay Singh,Sudhir Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Digvijay Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.S.Parihar, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his prayer for bail submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive and he has committed no offence. It is next contended that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and false recovery has been shown against the applicant. It is also contended that there is no eye witness or independent witness of the alleged recovery. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 11.12.2017. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶9

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Bhupandra Pal @ Chootu involved in Case Crime No.1383 of 2017, under Sections 379, 411,414, 420 I.P.C., Police Station Majhola, District Muradabad be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.

¶10

The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶11

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶12

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶13

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 22.2.2018 IA

Bhupandra Pal @ Chootu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhupandra Pal @ Chootu 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shailendra Kumar Maurya Vs State of U.P.

Rupesh Vs State of U.P.

Devdatt Alias Pati Ram and Other Vs State of U.P.

Karunesh Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Karunesh Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Bushra Aslam Vs State of U.P.