Allowed

Murari @ Kshatrapal Goswami v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Sept 2018BAIL/4370/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Cr. Misc. B.A. No. 4370 of 2016 for murder, the court, without expressing opinion on merits, granted bail to the applicant subject to furnishing personal bond and two sureties and adherence to specific conditions regarding witness tampering and appearance.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to compliance with court directives and no criminal activity.

Murari @ Kshatrapal Goswami Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4370 of 2016

¶3

Applicant :- Murari @ Kshatrapal Goswami Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bal Ram Prasad Sen Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit and supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of State by learned AGA are taken on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 286 of 2015 under section 302 IPC , Police Station Kalyanpur , District Fatehpur during the pendency of trial.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with some ulterior motive. The first information report was initially lodged on 19.6.2016 with respect to the incident dated 18.6.2015 against unknown persons with regard to strangulation of Km. Poonam, the daughter of the complainant. The name of the applicant surfaced during the course of investigation that two brothers of the victim were lying in her adjacent. They had neither seen the applicant approaching to the victim nor heard her shrill and alarm while she was subjected to strangulation. When the victim did not wake up in the morning, they reached near to her and found her dead which vindicates that the incident was not seen by anyone. The victim has died in mysterious circumstances and the applicant has been roped in the present case merely on the basis of suspicion and incertitude. The post mortem report also does not corroborate the prosecution version. There is material inconsistency and conflict in the prosecution story casts shadow on its verity and truthfulness. The applicant is languishing in jail

¶9

since 11.7.2015. There are remote chances of trial being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. The applicant is appearing on each and every date and the prosecution witnesses are retracting and not cooperating with the trial. The life and liberty of the applicant cannot be slashed merely on suspicion and doubt. In case the applicant is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage. The victim has succumbed to injuries in a unnatural manner which is evident from the evidence on record. There are sufficient material showing the complicity of the applicant in the aforesaid case. The applicant was seen by the brothers of the victim approaching near to her. The applicant is involved in the serious offence of taking away the life of an innocent girl for the quenching of his lust. There is no reason to implicate the applicant falsely liberating the actual accused person,hence , the applicant Murari @ Kshatrapal Goswami does not deserve any indulgence.In case the applicant is released on bail he will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, let the applicant involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the trial.

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

The applicant shall report at the police station concern on each Monday in the first week every

¶16

month between 10 to 12 'O' clock to ensure his bonafide.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be open to the prosecution to move application for cancellation of bail.

¶18

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶19

Order Date :- 20.9.2018 Naim

Murari @ Kshatrapal Goswami v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murari @ Kshatrapal Goswami 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

Rakesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Munda Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Singh Vs State of U.P.

Arvind Vs State of U.P.

Deoraj Vs State of U.P.

Nazar Mohammad and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another