Allowed
Sant Lalu v. State of U.P.
Allahabad HCBAIL/5490/2019
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.…
What the court decided
AI extract
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.…
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. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5490 of 2019
Applicant :- Sant Lalu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Mehrotra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Shri Sudarshan Singh, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of first informant, same is taken on record.
Heard Shri Sudhir Mehrotra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Sudarshan Singh, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant has been falsely implicated in FIR dated 10.6.2018, according to which at 9.30 p.m. on 9.6.2018 Rahul Singh, nephew of first informant had left with his friends, applicant and co-accused by motorcycle and at 7.00 a.m. on 10.6.2018 first information was received about recovery of his dead body in the fields of village Anauli, by the side of road to Larha; that in FIR there is no averment that applicant and co-accused caused death of deceased, but since they gone with deceased, they were taken into custody and made accused on their confessional statements in police custody as well as recovery of a shocker of motorcycle on their joint pointing from open wheat fields, a public place on the road side, of which there is no independent witness; that father of deceased in his statement under Section 161, Cr.P.C. has stated that there was litigation of deceased with Manager and Secretary of Qabristan Committee and before incident in question deceased was also having dispute with Tinku Khan and Amzad Khan, on installation of a hand pump by deceased near the restaurant and so their role is also to be investigated in view of their involvement in the murder of his son, Rahul; that co-accused Sattan Rajbhar @ Jwala having identical role has been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 8.1.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.535 of 2019, copy filed at Annexure-8; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant had no motive to cause death of Rahul; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 13.6.2018.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer of bail. Learned counsel for the first informant also submitted that on 2.2.2019 on account of old enmity father of applicant had beaten father of deceased with iron rod regarding which NCR was lodged by father of deceased on 3.2.2019 under Sections 323, 504, IPC; that the applicant, if released on bail, will misuse liberty of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, grant of bail to co-accused 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.
Let the applicant Sant Lalu be released on bail in S.T. No.191 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 61 of 2018, under Section 302 I.P.C., P.S. Khanpur, District Ghazipur, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(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.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
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.
Order Date :- 11.2.2019 T. Sinha
Sant Lalu
Harsh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court