Allowed

Amar Nath Pandey v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Apr 2019BAIL/13349/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the applicant sought release in a case involving alleged murder and antemortem drowning. The court noted the applicant had no criminal history and lacked independent evidence against him. The court allowed bail on bond and sureties, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13349 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Amar Nath Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Shukla,Ashok Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri H.P. Gupta, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged by Inspector against unknown person alleging that one girl dead was found in the river, subsequently, dead body was identified as of Chanchal. During investigation, it was found that Vijay Kumar @ Jhinaku (father of deceased) was the tempo driver, when he came his house, deceased asked her father to pay her school fee; co-accused Vijay Kumar pressed the neck of his daughter (deceased) unfortunately she died. Vijay Kumar called Amar Nath Pandey (applicant); they threw the dead body in the river. According to postmortem report, cause of death was asphyxia as a result of antemortem drowning.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicant was not named in the F.I.R. During investigation, the name of applicant was surfaced. Applicant is uncle (mama) of deceased. Main role was assigned to co-accused Vijay Kumar (father of deceased). Applicant is the relative of Vijay Kumar due to which he has been falsely implicated. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. Nothing was recovered from the possession of applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 27.12.2018 (more than three months) having no criminal history 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 applicant has no criminal history.

¶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 Amar Nath Pandey involved in Case Crime No. 309 of 2018, under Sections 302, 201, 34 IPC, Police Station Lalganj, District Basti 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

Amar Nath Pandey v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amar Nath Pandey 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

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.

Ankit Vs State of U.P.

Banwari Vs State of U.P.