Tejpal Verma v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Single judge granted bail to Tejpal Verma accused under Section 304 IPC in a death case, finding it a fit case for bail without commenting on merits.
What did the court decide?
Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of attendance and non-tampering.
What the court decided
Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13587 of 2019
Applicant :- Tejpal Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandrajeet Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant has been falsely implicated; that as per averments made in FIR lodged by Jagdish, on 10.1.2019 his son Sanjay came to his house in village Buxar, P.S. Simbhawali, District Hapur in which tenants were living in different portions on rent as his father-in-law, Tejpal, applicant and brother-in-law, Manoj had let out different portions to different tenants and for evicting tenants there was an scuffle between Sanjay with his father-inlaw, Tejpal and brother-in-law, Manoj and during scuffle Sanjay sustained head injury as well as grievous injuries on his body and was admitted in Government Hospital by public from where due to serious condition he was referred to Meerut Medical College where he died due to injuries sustained; that as per postmortem report of deceased dated 11.1.2019, he sustained as many as six ante mortem injuries and cause of death was mentioned as cerebral damage consequent upon blunt force trauma to head injury, which are ante mortem in nature; that in FIR itself it has also been mentioned that Sanjay was admitted in hospital by his mother-in-law, Kusumlata, wife of applicant and first informant in his statement under Section 161, Cr.P.C. at Annexure-6 has assigned role of causing head injury by brick to co-accused Manoj; that applicant has not been assigned with any specific role of causing injury to deceased and applicant had no motive to cause injuries to his son-in-law; that injuries have been accidentally sustained by deceased during scuffle without any intention; that real fact is that the house in question belong to Savita, daughter of applicant, who was married to Sanjay about 14 years back, who was blessed with two children and was abeted to commit suicide by Sanjay, deceased of which FIR was lodged by applicant, copy at Annexure-1; that case of applicant is distinguishable from Manoj; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 11.1.2019.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Tejpal Verma
Coram
Harsh Kumar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · April
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/13587/2019
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court