The Court considered a bail application by Lakshimi and Lata, who claimed false implication and lack of evidence in a murder case involving circumstantial proof. The Court held it a fit case for bail.
Applicants to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
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. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56453 of 2019
Applicant :- Lakshimi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Govil Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Govil, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application have been filed by the applicant Lakshimi and Lata with a prayer to enlarge them on bail in Case Crime No. 722, under Section 302 read with 34 I.P.C., Police Station Highway, District Mathura.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated and there is no evidence against them. The whole case is based on circumstantial evidence and recovery of some money to the tune of Rs. 25,000/- to 30,000/-. The accused applicants were living as tenant in the same building and deceased was also a tenant in the same. Further submission is that after due consideration to the facts and circumstances of the case, co-accused Ramesh has been already released on bail by this Court vide order dated 22.11.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 51336 of 2019. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. He has, however, conceded that after investigation charge sheet has been already submitted.
Considering the submissions of both the sides, on the basis of
parity and the material record placed before this Court, I find it to be a fit case for bail.
Let the applicants involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The applicants 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 they are 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 applicants will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicants 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 applicants to prison.
Order Date :- 19.12.2019 PS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in the prescribed custodial proceedings.
Lakshimi
Lata
State of U.P.
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
