Allowed

Deepak Katheria v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Mar 2018BAIL/7635/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is decided for the applicant Deepak Katheria by Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh. The Court disposed of the case by granting bail, citing the circumstantial nature of evidence and the applicant's previous bail history.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Deepak Katheria released on bail with personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount.

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

¶1

Court No. - 17

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7635 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Deepak Katheria Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Ashraf Abbasi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

¶5

This application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 31 of 2017, under Sections 302, 201, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Armapur, District Kanpur Nagar, during the pendency of trial.

¶6

As per FIR, the prosecution's case is that on 13.5.2017 at 10:00 pm, the father of the first informant Satyendra Kumar had gone out from home on a motor-cycle but did not return. He came to know the next morning that his father was murdered by bricks and iron rod by some unknown persons and he expressed apprehension that his murder might have been committed by Munshi Amar and Amar. On the said information, FIR was registered on 14.5.2017 at 7:30 am.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the sole evidence against the accused-applicant has been given by Rishabh Tiwari, who is stated that he had seen the deceased on the motor-cycle being driven by Jay @ Yash @ Mishri Tiwari and present accused-applicant was also sitting thereon. It is stated that this statement had been given by him three days after the inquest, although he was a witness of inquest also and at the time of inquest he did not reveal this fact. Further it is argued that the confessional statement is alleged to have been made by the applicant and at his pointing out an iron rod is also alleged to have been recovered from a 'Nala'. There is no public witness of the said recovery. He has two criminal cases against him and in each of them he had been granted bail by this Court. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.5.2017. If he is released on bail, he would not misuse the liberty.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer of bail, but has not controverted the aforesaid fact.

¶9

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

¶10

In view of above arguments, looking to the fact that there is

¶11

only circumstantial evidence of last seen and the confessional statement of the accused-applicant as well as recovery of weapon used in commission of the offence from an open place, criminal history has been explained of both the cases, wherein he has been granted bail, taking into consideration the quantum of punishment, nature of offence and period of detention, without expressing any opinion on the merits, this case is found to be a fit case for bail.

¶12

Let the applicant Deepak Katheria 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 :- 8.3.2018 A.P. Pandey

Deepak Katheria v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Katheria 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

Munni Devi Vs Sate of U.P.

Suneel Vs State of U.P.

Suraj @ Suryanath Vs State of U.P.

Malkhan Singh and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Uvaish Vs State of U.P.

Baghe Singh @ Shatrughan Singh Vs State of U.P. and Anr.