Allowed

Nageshwar Pal @ Bhole Pal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Jan 2019BAIL/2318/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application for bail under Section 302 IPC, the Court granted release to the applicant who was falsely implicated and named later in the investigation, finding he has made out a case for bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of not interfering with witnesses or evidence and attending trial.

Nageshwar Pal @ Bhole Pal Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2318 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Nageshwar Pal @ Bhole Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Tiwary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

This case is being taken up as per order of Hon'ble The Chief Justice vide order dated 17.1.2019.

¶6

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

¶7

According to prosecution case, FIR was lodged on 13.7.2018 at 20:44 hours against Babloo Pal alleging that Raju Maurya was working at the shop of Babloo Pal; Babloo Pal has committed fraud with Raju Pal by getting his land executed in his favour without consideration and on 25.6.2018 Babloo Pal alongwith his associates came to the house of first informant and informed that her husband was ill and admitted in the hospital; when first informant went to see her husband in the hospital, it was informed by the hospital that Raju Maurya was brought dead by Babloo Pal and his associates; she found injury on the head of her husband. Further, on 4.7.2018, Babloo Pal threatened saying that if she lodges report, he would kill children and wife of deceased. Accused Babloo Pal has killed her husband.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the FIR. Name of applicant was surfaced later on in the statement of Lal Bihari after thought and with legal consultation. Lal Bihari has stated that the role of applicant was of catching hold. He has been falsely implicated being brother of accused Babloo Pal. Even though, role of applicant is extended upto catching hold only. He is languishing in jail since 28.7.2018(about six months) having no criminal history. There is no independent witness. In case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant. He admitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he was not named in the FIR.

¶10

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation, period of custody, gravity

¶11

of offence and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let applicant Nageshwar Pal @ Bhole Pal involved in Case Crime No.131 of 2018, under Section 302, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Aadampur, District Varanasi 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:

¶13

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

¶14

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

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.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 21.1.2019 P.P.

Nageshwar Pal @ Bhole Pal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nageshwar Pal @ Bhole Pal 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

Ramanand Vs State of U.P.

Nanhe Pal Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Vs State of U.P.

Sajid Vs State of U.P.

Kamran Vs State of U.P.

Saleem Vs State of U.P.