The High Court of Uttar Pradesh granted bail to an applicant charged with murder. The court found it a fit case for bail noting the applicant was not named in the FIR, the arrest was irregular based on a subsequent confession, and there were no criminal antecedents.
Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 25
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 139 of 2019
Applicant :- Dharmendra Yadav @ Kariya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail has been prayed by Dharmendra Yadav @ Kariya in Case Crime No. 94 of 2018, under Section 302/34 I.P.C., Police Station Madiyahun, District Jaunpur, on the ground that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number. He was not named in the First Information Report. Co-accused has confessed this, in which the present accused-applicant was arrested 17.4.2018 in Case Crime No. 101 of 2018 and a confessional statement under the pressure of police was got recorded. The applicant is permanent resident of village Kanava, Police Station Madiyahun, District Jaunpur. Bail has been prayed for.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail but this fact has been admitted that no criminal antecedent before this report was there.
The accused-applicant was not named in the F.I.R. He was arrested in a subsequent case in which a confessional statement was made admitting the present occurrence. The subsequent statement of informant Devanand Pandey is of this fact that he was not the eye-witness account rather Neeraj Dubey has taken Pawan Kumar @ Ashu Pandey. The independent witnesses were of the last scene of quarrel in between Neeraj Debey and deceased where present accused-applicant is along with one other was present.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Dharmendra Yadav @ Kariya be released on bail in Case Crime No. 94 of 2018, under Sections 302/34 I.P.C., P.S. Madiyahun, District Jaunpur, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 9.1.2019
Kamarjahan
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is a fit case for bail given that he was not named in the FIR and his arrest procedure was irregular.
Whether the severity of punishment and totality of facts justify granting bail at this stage.
Dharmendra Yadav @ Kariya
Ram Krishna Gautam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
