Allowed

Ram Murti Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Sept 2019BAIL/2053/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted bail to Ram Murti Singh inSection 364 IPC case notwithstanding previous rejection, citing larger mandate of Article 21 and Dataram Singh, subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties furnishing personal bond in like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with conditions against tampering, indulging in criminal activiti

Ram Murti Singh Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2053 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Murti Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Singh,Amrendra Nath Rai

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The second bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Ram Murti Singh with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 176 of 2017, under Section 364 IPC, Police Station Ahraula, DistrictAzamgarh, during pendency of trial.

¶8

Submission is that first bail application of the applicant has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 07.10.2017. The applicant has been implicated for offence under Section 364 IPC. It has been submitted that from the statement of informant recorded by the trial court, he has not been able to prove that his son was kidnapped for the purpose of his murder or there was any danger of his being murdered. The informant has deposed before the trial court that he does not knows what was the intention of the accuseds of kidnapping his son. He stated that accuseds knew the reason for kidnapping his son and he does not knows why his son was kidnapped by them. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The ingredients of Section 364 IPC have not been proved by the informant in his statement recorded by the trial court in S.T. No. 511 of 2017. The applicant does not have any criminal history to his credit and he is languishing in jail since 26.3.2017. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in

¶10

similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶16

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶17

Order Date :- 12.9.2019 Ruchi Agrahari

Ram Murti Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Murti Singh 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vipin Kumar @ Pappi Vs State of U.P.

Chameli Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Vs State of U.P.

Ashutosh Singh Vs State of U.P.

Satish Lodhi Vs State of U.P.

Suhail Vs State of U.P.