Allowed

Harikishan @ Harikrishna v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2019BAIL/5486/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge order allowing bail to an applicant pending trial for an assault case resulting in death, noting a co-accused's earlier release and agreeing to standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions preventing evidence tampering, witness intimidation, and ensuring court appearance.

Harikishan @ Harikrishna Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5486 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Harikishan @ Harikrishna Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rang Nath Pandey,Rahul Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Smt. Ladlee Pandey, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against four accused persons, namely Hariom, Rupendra, Harikrishn and Yogesh alleging that on 18.9.2018 they assaulted Laxmi Devi (mother of complainant) and Annu (brother of complainant). Laxmi Devi received five injuries, resultantly died due to chest injury. Annu received five injuries but not dangerous to life.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that coaccused namely Rupendra has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 3.1.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 43056 of 2018, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is general allegation against the applicant. F.I.R. was lodged after one day without explaining delay. After thought, the false story was developed with legal consultation due to previous enmity. 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 15.1.2019 (22 days) 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 and the case of present applicant is identical to coaccused Rupendra who has been enlarged on bail.

¶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 Harikishan @ Harikrishna involved in Case

¶11

Crime No. 57 of 2018, under Sections 304, 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Basai Jagner, District Agra 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:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 7.2.2019 A. Singh

Harikishan @ Harikrishna v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harikishan @ Harikrishna 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

Gendi @ Gedan Vs State of U.P.

Mehraj Vs State of U.P.

Mintu Giri Vs State of U.P.

Mirul Hassan and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Satya Kumar Mishra and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mukesh Vs State of U.P.