Allowed

Pramod v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Jan 2019BAIL/2626/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Pramod accused of murder under sections 302 and 120B IPC. The court considered affidavits claiming false implication and lack of criminal antecedents before granting bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was enlarged on bail upon executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to four conditions including appearing regularly and not tampering with evidence.

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

¶1

Court No. - 25

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2626 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Pramod Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishnu Pratap Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA representing the State. Perused the record.

¶6

This bail application has been filed by applicant Pramod in Case Crime No. 444 of 2018, under sections 302, 120B I.P.C., P.S. Ekotech-III, District Gautam Buddh Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the accusedapplicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case crime number whereas the complainant-informant and his father in their affidavits, entered in the case diary, have specifically stated that the applicant Pramod is of no concern with this occurrence and this information was not intended to be lodged against him but the scribe of the report has wrongly written against him. The accused-applicant is of no criminal antecedent. Bail has been prayed for.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the bail application with this contention that in the F.I.R. as well as in the statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. there is accusation against the present applicant.

¶9

The very perusal of first information report reveals that the deceased had gone with applicant Pramod on 27.10.2018 at about 11.00 A.M. and he did not turn up till 29.10.2018 when his dead body in decomposed condition was found. This was suspected and believed to be murder committed by Pramod, but when the deceased went with Pramod on 27.10.2018 at 11.00 A.M. the family members of the deceased never objected to it whereas some quarrel is said to have occurred 20-25 days back. On the one hand there has been suspicion of untoward happening and on the other hand the deceased went with applicant Pramod without any objection of any family member of the deceased.

¶10

Looking to the affidavits, which are part of case diary, no criminal antecedent of the applicant and considering the entire facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court is of the view

¶11

that the applicant may be enlarged on bail with certain conditions.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant, Pramod, involved in above mentioned Case Crime number be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶14

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶15

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶16

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶17

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶18

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 21.1.2019

¶20

Pcl

Pramod v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aadi Ram Vs State of U.P. and 5 Ors.

Faizan and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rupendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mantoo Yadav @ Govardhan Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Sheru Bhati Vs State of U.P.

Gajendra Pal Vs State of U.P.