Allowed

Munna v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Aug 2018CRLA/3606/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal against a bail rejection order, the High Court held that the appellant had made out a case for bail considering his length of custody, lack of criminal history, and suspicious prosecution story. The appeal was allowed and the impugned order setting aside the bail. The appellant was directed to be released on bail subject to standard conditions including surrendering anticip

What did the court decide?

The impugned order rejecting bail was set aside, and the appellant was directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 41

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3606 of 2018

¶3

Appellant :- Munna Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Gaurav Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Sri Kaushlesh Prasad Tiwari, Brief Holder for the State states that notice has been served personally but none is present on behalf of opposite party no. 2 Rajinder.

¶6

Heard Sri Gaurav Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Kaushlesh Prasad Tiwari, Brief Holder for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This criminal appeal has been filed against order dated 23.5.2018 passed by Additional Session Judge, Court No. 2 Shahjahanpur in Bail Application No. 1071 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 860 of 2017, under Section 307 IPC & Section 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kalan, DistrictShahjahanpur whereby bail application of appellant was rejected.

¶8

According to the prosecution case F.I.R. was lodged on 9.9.2017 against four accused persons namely Prempal, Vedram, Guddu and Munna alleging that on 7.9.2018 they shot fire at Raghunandan. He received one gun shot injury caused by accused Vedram.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 6.5.2018 (more than three months); having no criminal history; there is no independent witness against the appellant. Prosecution case is not supported by the medical evidence. Main role of causing firearm injury was assigned to co-accused Vedram. The entire prosecution story is absolutely false, baseless and concocted. The appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to previous enmity. There is no legal evidence against the applicant and if he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail or tamper with the evidence.

¶10

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and admitted that applicant has not criminal history.

¶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 23.5.2018 rejecting bail of appellant is hereby set aside.

¶12

Let appellant Munna involved in aforesaid case 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:-

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

4.The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶17

5.The appellant 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.

¶18

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

¶19

Office is directed to send the lower court record to the concerned court immediately, if it has been received.

¶20

Order Date :- 8.8.2018 A. Singh

Munna v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munna 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd.Rizwan Vs State of Up

Abdul Majid Vs Ram Dhani

Chhotey Lal Vs State

Manoj Kumar Rajpoot Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kamal Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brajraj Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another