Allowed

Nihal Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2018BAIL/44188/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 438 CrPC, this Court allowed bail to the applicant Nihal Singh charged with offences including murder (IPC 304), assault, and criminal conspiracy. The Court noted the applicant had no criminal history and the FIR assigned the main role to a co-accused.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses.

Nihal Singh Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44188 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Nihal Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against five accused persons, namely Nihal, Sushil @ Bittu, Kamal, Gaurav and Nemchand alleging that on 20.9.2018 they assaulted Devendra by kicks and fists, he received injuries, resultantly died. According to postmortem report, cause of death could not be ascertained and viscera was preserved.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. According to F.I.R., main role was assigned to co-accused Sushil @ Bittu. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. There are general allegation against all accused persons except coaccused Sushil @ Bittu. There is no independent witness and no eye witness account against the applicant. He is languishing in jail since 21.9.2018 (near about two and half 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.

¶8

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.

¶9

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.

¶10

Let the applicant Nihal Singh involved in Case Crime No. 1049 of 2018, under Sections 147, 452, 304, 506 IPC, Police Station Saradhana, 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:

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 4.12.2018

¶18

A. Singh

Nihal Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nihal Singh 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

Mohammad Alam Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Aslam Vs State of U.P.

Sazib and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Musahar Vs State of U.P.

Satish Tomar Vs State of U.P.

Angad Nishad Vs State of U.P.