Allowed

Ankit v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Apr 2019BAIL/13329/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a bail application filed by Ankit in a murder case under Section 302 IPC. Relying on the fact that co-accused were already released on bail and noting lack of specific evidence against the applicant, the Court ordered his release on bail with sureties and standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Ankit released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each.

Ankit Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13329 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ankit Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Singh,Mayank Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against unknown persons alleging that on 14.10.2018 they stopped the car of Sarvjeet Singh (husband of complainant) and shot fire on neck, resultantly died. During investigation, the name of Lokendra, Ankit and Nitin was surfaced.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that coaccused namely Lokendra and Nitin have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 11.2.2019 and 27.3.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 5627 of 2019 and 12167 of 2019, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. Applicant was not named in the F.I.R. During investigation, the name of applicant was surfaced. Nothing was recovered from the possession of applicant. There is general allegation against the applicant. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 17.11.2018 (more than four months) criminal history of five case has been properly explained and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that criminal history has been explained and the case of present applicant is identical to co-accused Lokendra and Nitin who have been enlarged on bail.

¶9

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, 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 opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶10

Let applicant Ankit involved in Case Crime No. 916 of 2018, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Kharkhauda, District Meerut 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:

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

5.The applicant 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.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 1.4.2019 A. Singh

Ankit v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit 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

Arjun Vs State of U.P.

Sunita Devi Vs State of U.P.

Brijesh Vs State of U.P.

Nabi Alam Vs State of U.P.

Banwari Vs State of U.P.

Amar Nath Pandey Vs State of U.P.