Allowed

Gangaram Gangwar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Jan 2019BAIL/3358/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application filed by Gangaram Gangwar, who was accused of murder. The court found the accused falsely implicated, noted the absence of independent witnesses, and assigned a specific role to the co-accused while acknowledging the applicant's criminal history was absent.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3358 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Gangaram Gangwar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Mangal Pandey,Kuldeep Kumar Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. Vakalatnama filed by Sri Om Narayan Pandey, learned counsel on behalf of first informant is taken on record.

¶6

This case has been assigned by the Hon'ble The Chief Justice vide order dated 25.1.2019.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Om Narain Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant as well as Sri P.K. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

According to prosecution case, FIR was lodged on 24.7.2018 against two persons namely, Manoj Gangwar and Gangaram Gangwar(brother-in-law of Manoj) alleging that on 23.7.2018 Shobhit Gupta was called by Manoj Gangwar and Ganga Ram Gangwar from his house; he went with them. Later on, dead body of Shobhit Gupta was found having received one firearm injury on face. During investigation, it was found that he was shot by Manoj Gangawar on exhortation of this accused.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is languishing in jail since 26.7.2018(about six months). One case against the applicant has been explained in paragraph 6 of supplementary affidavit. He has been falsely implicated only because he is brother-in-law(shala) of Manoj Gangwar. He is residing in another village. There is neither any eye-witness account nor any independent witness. Specific role has been assigned to co-accused Manoj Gangwar. In case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶10

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.

¶11

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

¶12

the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let applicant Gangaram Gangwar involved in Case Crime No.334 of 2018, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Katra, District Shahjahanpur 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:

¶14

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

¶15

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

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.

¶19

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

¶20

It is made clear that another co-accused cannot take parity of this bail order.

¶21

Order Date :- 25.1.2019 P.P.

Gangaram Gangwar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gangaram Gangwar 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

Alok Mishra Alias Santosh Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Pasu Vs State of U.P.

Bittu Giri Vs State of U.P.

Ali Hasan Vs State of U.P.

Saddam Vs State of U.P.

Mahesh Upadhyay Vs State of U.P.