Allowed

parmeshwar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Mar 2019BAIL/2339/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail applications filed by four accused persons facing murder charges. Considering their lack of criminal history and the delay in trial, the court directed their release on personal bond and sureties with standard bail conditions to prevent tampering and absconding.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence, intimidate witnesses, or flee.

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

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2339 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Parmeshwar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mr Shashi Ranjan Srivastava,Mr Virendra Pratap Singh,Nazrul Islam Jafri,A/V0486 Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as Sri Pankaj Rai, learned Brief Holder for the State and perused the record.

¶7

According to prosecution case, FIR was lodged on 23.8.2017 against four persons namely, Parmeshwar, Ramsingar, Santosh and Prabhu Nath alleging that on 30.7.2015 they killed Rama Shanker due to enmity and hanged the dead body with the Neem tree. According to postmortem report, cause of death was found hanging.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are languishing in jail since 16.10.2014(more than four years and five months) having no criminal history. They have been falsely implicated due to previous enmity. No injury was found on the body of deceased except hanging. There is no legal evidence. There is neither any recovery nor any eyewitness account/independent witness. General role is alleged against all accused persons. There is no possibility to get this case decided in near future. In case applicants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and 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 applicants. He admitted that the applicants have no criminal history.

¶10

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation, period of custody, gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let applicants Parmeshwar, Ramsingar, Santosh and Prabhunath involved in Case Crime No.0617 of 2017, under Section 302, 201 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Deoria be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two

¶12

sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶13

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

¶14

2.The applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

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

¶16

4.The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

¶17

5.The applicants 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 :- 27.3.2019

¶20

P.P.

parmeshwar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

parmeshwar 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

Deepu Yadav @ Ajay Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Veer Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sukhdevi Vs State of U.P.

Suresh Chandra Vs State of U.P.

Upendra Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.

Guddu Singh Sengar @ Raghvendra Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.