Allowed

Krishna Thakur v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 May 2018CRLA/254/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Appeal against rejection of bail petition. The court held that the appellant made out a case for bail due to parity with a co-accused already released, lack of independent witnesses against him, and no criminal history. The impugned order setting aside. Bail granted with the personal sureties.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 19.12.2017 setting bail is set aside. Appellant to be released on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties.

Krishna Thakur Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 254 of 2018

¶3

Appellant :- Krishna Thakur Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Satya Narayan Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned Counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondent, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

The present Criminal Appeal has been filed against the order dated 19.12.2017 passed by learned Session/Special Judge, Lalitpur, in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 482 of 2017 (Bhagwan Das Lodhi and another Vs.State) in Case Crime No. 262 of 2017, under Sections 302, 201, 120B I.P.C. and 3(2)5 of S.C/S.T. Act, Police Station Saujana, District Lalitpur whereby bail application was rejected.

¶8

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged on 29.07.2017 against four accused persons, namely, Dev Singh Thakur, Bhagwan Das, Krishna Thakur, Ramla Ahirwar alleging that on 28.07.2017 they killed the deceased Thanua (brother of the complainant) by shot fire he received one gun shot injury shot by Dev Singh Thakur, resultantly died; country made pistol, motorcycle and cartridges were recovered on the pointing out of coaccused Dev Singh Thakur.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant submitted that the co-accused Ramla Ahirwar has already been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.11.2017 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 45537 of 2017, copy of which has been taken on record; the role of the applicant is identical to the co-accused who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity; the main role of firing has been assigned against coaccused Dev Singh Thakur; there is no independent witness against the applicant; only one gunshot injury was found on the body of the deceased; in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial; he is languishing in jail since 29.07.2017 (more than nine and half months);having no criminal history.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the respondent opposed the prayer for bail but admitted that there is no criminal history against appellant and submits that appeal has to be dismissed.

¶11

For the foregoing discussions, 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 view that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The appeal is allowed. Impugned order dated 19.12.2017 rejecting bail of appellant is hereby set aside.

¶12

Let the appellant/applicant Krishna Thakur be released in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 482 of 2017 (Bhagwan Das Lodhi and another

¶13

Vs.State) in Case Crime No. 262 of 2017, under Sections 302, 201,120B I.P.C. and 3(2)5 of S.C/S.T. Act, Police Station Saujana, District Lalitpur on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

i) The appellant/applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶15

ii) The appellant/applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶16

iii) The appellant/applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶17

iv) The appellant/applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the appellant/applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which appellant/applicant is suspected.

¶18

v) The appellant/applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicant from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 17.5.2018 A. Tripathi

Krishna Thakur v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Thakur v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Amit Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Devi Prasad and Another Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Munesh Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shanti Devi Vs State of U.P.

Abhay Nandan Tiwari Vs State of U.P.