The Court granted bail to the applicant in a murder case involving Section 302 IPC, noting that most co-accused were already on bail, while observing that the applicant had absconded for five years.
Released on bail with a personal bond and two heavy sureties under specified conditions.
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. - 48232 of 2019
Applicant : - Ravindra Yadav Opposite Party : - State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant : - Manoj Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party : - G.A.,Neelabh Srivastava
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
It has been contented by learned counsel for the applicant that seven accused persons including the applicant have been named in the FIR. It has further submitted that cross report was also lodged on the wishes of N.C.R. from the side of the applicant. It has further submitted that Lathi has been shown in the hand of the applicant. The deceased received some injury on his head which can also be caused by an axe and co-accused Jai Prakash Yadav and Virendra Yadav are said to have assaulted the deceased with an axe and it is doubtful whether injury sustained by the deceased was of Lathi injury or axe. It has further submitted that Jethu Yadav, Sher Bahadur, Santosh in whose hands Lathi-Danda has been shown, have already been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.10.2014 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.35192 of 2014. Virendra Yadav and Jai Prakash Yadav in their hands axe has been shown, have also enlarged on bail by another Bench of this Court, vide order dated 10.11.2014 and 01.12.2014 respectively. Other co-accused Rampati Yadav has also enlarged on bail by another Bench of this Court, vide order dated 11.11.2014, therefore, applicant is also entitled for bail. It has further been submitted that there is general allegation against applicant. No specific role assigned to the applicant. There is no criminal history of the applicant and he is in jail since 21.10.2019.
Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail and argued that this incident has taken place in the year, 2014. The applicant has surrendered after five years of the alleged incident. After the incident the applicant had gone to abroad and he returned on 28.08.2019. The applicant remained absconder for five years, 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 Ravindra Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 209 of 2014, under Section 147, 302, 307, 308, 324, 323, 325, 504, 506 and 34 IPC Police Station Sarpataha, District Jaunpur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and with two heavy 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 :- 15.11.2019
PKC
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a murder case where he surrendered after five years of absconding.
Ravindra Yadav
Bachchoo Lal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
