Mantoo Yadav @ Govardhan Yadav v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
The court dismissed the bail application of Mantoo Yadav in a murder case (s.302 IPC) involving firearm injuries to multiple persons, citing heinous nature of the offence, severe punishment, and risk of tampering with evidence.
What did the court decide?
Bail application dismissed; application rejected.
What the court decided
Court No. - 25
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2638 of 2019
Applicant :- Mantoo Yadav @ Govardhan Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mithilesh Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
This bail application has been filed by applicant Mantoo Yadav alias Govardhan Yadav in Case Crime No. 515 of 2017, u/s 147, 148/34, 302, 307, 120B I.P.C., P.S. Karanda, District Ghazipur.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA representing the State. Perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the first information report was lodged against unknown assailants and after about one month when the police could not trace out the real assailants, the name of the accused-applicant along with others has been disclosed whereas the complainant side was fully aware about whereabouts of the accused-applicant and no other witness is there. Bail has been prayed for.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application with contention that the injured witness when got recovered was examined by police and he had narrated the name of accused persons, who had given firearm shots to the deceased and the injured and the case was investigated.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a FIR u/s 302 IPC involving a brutal murder with likelihood of tampering of evidence.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Mantoo Yadav @ Govardhan Yadav
Coram
Ram Krishna Gautam
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · January
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/2638/2019
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court