Allowed

Arvind Bansal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Jan 2019BAIL/40699/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application, the court entertained arguments regarding accidental nature of the incident and lack of criminal history. Unexpressed opinion on merits, the court held it a fit case for bail, discharging the applicant on a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Arvind Bansal was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.

Arvind Bansal Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40699 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Arvind Bansal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dhirendra Mohan Chaudhary

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ramesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dhirendra Mohan Chaudhary, learned counsel for the complainant as well as Sri Kaushlesh Prasad Tiwari, brief holder for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against Arvind and two unknown persons alleging that on 15.7.2018, in the birthday party of grand son of Ravindra Kumar; Arvind shot one fire at Akur (son of complainant), resultantly died. The case was registered under Section 302 IPC, later on that was converted under Section 304 IPC.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no intention or knowledge to kill deceased. During investigation, statement of Ravindra Kumar was recorded, he stated that harsh firing was made without intention or knowledge to kill the deceased. Statements of Pawan Kumar Goyal (father of deceased) and Anshul (brother of deceased) were recorded, they stated that incident was done accidentally. According to F.I.R., he shot fire at gun but recovery of pistol 315 bore was shown from the possession of applicant. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 18.7.2018 (more than five and half months) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history.

¶9

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶10

Let applicant Arvind Bansal involved in Case Crime No. 860 of 2018, under Sections 304 IPC, Police Station Loni Border, District Ghaziabad 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:

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

4.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.

¶15

5.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.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 10.1.2019 A. Singh

Arvind Bansal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Bansal 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

Kanhai Paswan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Suresh Pawar Vs State of U.P.

Aasim Vs State of U.P.

Ishraq Vs State of U.P.

Arpan Vs State of U.P.

Kitab Singh Vs State of U.P.