Allowed

Saurabh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Jan 2019BAIL/47000/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge allowed bail to the applicant charged under the IPC for murder. The court found it a fit case for bail despite severity of punishment, noting the complicity of co-accused and the applicant's submission of undertaking not to misuse liberty.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail in Case Crime No.228 of 2018 upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, no tampering with evidence, and no unlawful activities.

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

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47000 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Saurabh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kapil Tyagi,Samarth Sinha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant is not named in F.I.R. dated 26.5.2018 lodged by Ram Niwash Verma regarding shot in dead of Tek Ram by unknown persons; that postmortem report states that deceased sustained three gun shot wounds which were cause of his death; that during investigation, statement of Brahm Singh was recorded to the effect that in the year 2014 Tek Ram deceased had given a Danda blow in the head of his daughter-in-law Sushila, wife of Baliram who died during treatment and since then her son Pinku and husband Baliram respectively grandson and son of Tek Ram were having enmity with Tekram; that thereafter one Praveen Kumar moved an application that applicant and his associates had threatened him; that on 5.8.2018 confessional statement of coaccused Vasu recorded that he along with his associates were hired for Rs.1.00 lakh for eliminating Tek Ram and similar confessional statement of applicant was also recorded; that the confessional statement of applicant in police custody is not admissible in evidence; that recovery of Aadhaar Card of deceased at the pointing of applicant has been falsely planted of which there is no independent witness; that applicant was neither hired nor caused any firearm injury to deceased Tek Ram; that the applicant had no motive to cause death of 75 years old Tek Ram, and in any case the alleged motive (too remote) of incident of 2014 was only with Pinku the grandson of deceased; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 5.6.2018.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.

¶8

Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶9

Let the applicant Saurabh be released on bail in Case Crime No.228 of 2018, under Sections 302, 120-B and 404 I.P.C., P.S. Gulavti, District Bulandshahar, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶10

(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.

¶11

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶12

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶13

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶14

Order Date :- 10.1.2019 VS

Saurabh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashwani Singh Vs State of U.P.

Shravan Vs State of U.P.

Amit Vs State of U.P.

Raju Vs State of U.P.

Vishal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Vs State of U.P.