Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal J. granted bail to Santosh Kumar Bind in a murder case. Despite recovery of weapons from the applicant's house, the court viewed the case as a fit one for bail, releasing him on personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions.
Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 41
Case : - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48206 of 2019
Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Bind Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Sri Jitendra Pal Singh and Niraj Kumar Diwedi, learned counsel, has filed a joint vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant, let it be taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is not named in the FIR. FIR was lodged against unknown. The name of the applicant came into light in the statement of informant Ashutosh Chaturvedi @ Rajan in which he has stated that about one year ago some dispute had taken place between deceased and the applicant and co-accused Yogendra Bind. In the statement of Bablu Tiwari, it has come that at the time of alleged incident, co-accused Yogendra Bind opened fired upon the deceased and co-accused Faijan was driving motorcycle. Ajay Kumar and Deepak Dubey have also claimed to be eyewitness of the alleged occurrence. In the statement of above witnesses, it has come that co-accused Yogendra Bind opened fired upon the deceased. The allegation of hatching conspiracy has been levelled against the applicant. There is no motive to commit alleged offence. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. There is no criminal history of the applicant and he is in jail since 07.04.2019.
Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail and argued that on the pointing out of co-accused Yogendra Bind the pistol and the motorcycle used in the commission of offence have been recovered from the house of applicant, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.
Having given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Santosh Kumar Bind involved in Case
Crime No. 118 of 2019, under Section 302 and 120B/34 IPC Police Station Vindhyachal, District Mirzapur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions;
1.The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 14.11.2019
PKC
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail given recovery of weapons from his house despite lack of naming in FIR.
Whether the allegation of conspiracy and motivelessness affects the grant of bail.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Santosh Kumar Bind
State of U.P.
Bachchoo Lal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
