This judgment rejects a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a murder case. The single judge held that strong evidence exists and the case of affliction is not fit for grant of bail, distinguishing the role in the coordinate order.
Application for bail rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 17
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9099 of 2018
Applicant :- Bauwa Alias Arvind Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Indra Kumar Chaturvedi,Vikas Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
This Bail Application (under Section 439 Cr.P.C.) has been moved for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 75 of 2017 under Section 302 I.P.C., P.S. Kadaura, District Jalaun.
According to the F.I.R., the prosecution case is that on 10.05.2017 at about 1.00 p.m. in the night, first informant and his son were lying on separate cots , outside his house. The first informant heard some sound, right then, of a motorcycle, number of which is mentioned in the F.I.R. accused Bauva @ Arvind, Bardani and one unknown person fired upon the his son. The first informant had woken up after hearing the sound of fire which was made by Bauwa @ Arvind. He had identified the three accused who were armed with weapons and then fled away by the motor-cycle. Deceased was referred to the hospital where he was declared dead. This occurrence was given effect on the basis of an old enmity.
It has been argued on behalf of the learned counsel for the accused applicant that accused applicant has been falsely implicated in this case; first informant is not an eye witness in this case because he had woken up only after the accused had already fired upon the deceased; his role is at par with the role of the co-accused; he has no criminal history; the accused applicant is in jail since 28.05.2017; if the accused is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail and has pointed out that in the bail order of the co-accused, Bardani, the coordinate Bench expressly distinguished the role by mentioning that the role of assaulting the deceased has been assigned to the present accused and on that ground, he was granted bail. In postmortem report, the deceased has sustained only one fire arm injury which is injury attributed to the present accused, hence, bail should be refused.
Looking to the fact that there is strong evidence against the
present accused which could not be disbelieved at this stage.
This is not a fit case for grant of bail and it is, accordingly, rejected.
Order Date :- 14.3.2018 A. Mandhani
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case involving murder.
Whether the coordinate order granting bail to a co-accused impacts the eligibility for bail in this case.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Bauwa Alias Arvind
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
