Allowed

Suneel v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Mar 2018BAIL/6918/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6918 of 2018 regarding Case Crime No. 478 of 2017 under Sections 302, 201 IPC. The court granted bail observing lack of direct evidence and expressed no opinion on merits before imposing standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions preventing tampering with witnesses and ensuring sincere cooperation in trial.

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

¶1

Court No. - 17

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6918 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Suneel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

¶5

This bail application has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.478 of 2017 under sections 302, 201 I.P.C., Police Station Friends Colony, District Etawah, during the pendency of trial.

¶6

As per FIR, the prosecution case is that on 6.8.2017 at 9.25 p.m. Satish (brother-in-law of the first informant), Girish Dewar of Sunita, sister of the first informant and Suneel (present accused) had gone to the house of the first informant and from there all the three persons went away together saying that they were going to Moonjganj. These persons together murdered Girish and had thrown his body in the canal. It is also mentioned that the sister of the first informant was in love with her Dewar Girish and due to that the brother-in-law Satish and Girish were having inimical terms.

¶7

The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that there is no direct evidence of anyone having seen the deceased being killed by the present accused. He had no motive to murder the decease. He is simply shown to be a friend of Girish (deceased). The mobile found, has been shown to have been recovered from the joint possession of both the accused. The applicant is not involved in any other criminal case. The applicant is absolutely innocent and is languishing in jail since 10.8.2017. In case the applicant is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but has not controverted the aforesaid facts.

¶9

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

¶10

In the light of the aforesaid arguments, looking to the fact that there is no direct evidence against the present accused of having caused murder of the deceased and the recovery of the mobile allegedly belonging to the deceased is also shown from joint

¶11

possession of both the accused and taking into consideration the nature of offence, quantum of punishment and period of detention in jail, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is found to be a fit case for bail.

¶12

Let the applicant Suneel 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 :-

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 7.3.2018 AU

Suneel v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suneel 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

Smt. Rani and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Chandan Singh Pradhan Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Pradeep Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Munni Devi Vs Sate of U.P.

Suraj @ Suryanath Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Rajpoot Vs State of U.P.