Allowed

Rubal Alias Tinku v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Apr 2019BAIL/35772/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal bail application challenging a murder charge under Section 302 IPC, the court allowed the application. The court found that absent direct evidence placing the accused at the scene, no case was made out, and granted bail with conditions to prevent tampering with witnesses and ensure trial cooperation.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties upon meeting specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35772 of 2017

¶3

Applicant :- Rubal Alias Tinku Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Gour,Birendra Singh Khokher,Hridesh Batra,Saumya Tripathi,Shri A.B.L. Gour Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Girish Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Anurag Khanna, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Hridesh Batra, learned Counsel for applicant, learned AGA for State and Sri Girish Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for complainant.

¶6

This bail application has been filed by the accused-applicant Rubal Alias Tinku, who is involved in Case Crime No.-463 of 2017, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Deoband, District Saharanpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case due to malafide intention for the purpose of harassment and no case is made out against him. He has not named in the FIR, his name came into light during investigation on the statement of Sanjay and Kuldeep. Nobody has seen the accused committing crime. Witnesses Sanjay and Kuldeep stated in statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that they had seen the accused with Katta. Meaning thereby they have not seen the accused to open fire on victim. Nothing has been recovered from possession of accused. It is next contended that applicant has no criminal history and there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 11.05.2017.

¶8

Per Contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned Counsel for complainant have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that accused is involved in heinous offence like murder and he has committed murder of victim on date, time and place stated by prosecution.

¶9

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and submission advanced by learned counsel for parties, nature of offence, severity of punishment, and without commenting upon the merit of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant

¶10

deserves bail.

¶11

Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let applicant Rubal Alias Tinku be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶15

During trial, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities.

¶16

In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶17

Order Date :- 1.4.2019 Vivek Kr./I.A.Siddiqui

Rubal Alias Tinku v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rubal Alias Tinku 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

Chandrapal Vs State of U.P.

Govind Vs State of U.P.

Sarfaraj Alam Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Alias Rakhi Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Jaiswal Vs State of U.P.

Raju Alias Rajeev Vs State of U.P.