Allowed

Bittu Alias Chandravir v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Feb 2019BAIL/6499/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Cr.M.C. No. 6499 of 2019, the High Court considered the case of Bittu Alias Chandravir charged in the murder of Rakesh. The applicant, brother of a co-accused with criminal antecedents, alleged the FIR was false. Despite the severity of the charges including murder by an unlawful assembly, the court found it fit to grant bail subject to conditions including cooperation

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions of cooperation with trial and no unlawful activities.

Bittu Alias Chandravir Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6499 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Bittu Alias Chandravir Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hemendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant has been falsely implicated being brother of co-accused Aditya, who is one of accused in case of murder of Mukesh, brother of deceased; that as per averments made in F.I.R. lodged after seven hours of incident first informant was going on motorcycle alongwith her husband Rakesh and on way applicant and seven others after surrounding them, by indiscriminate firing caused multiple fire arm injuries to her husband resulting in his death and fires also made on her but she escaped; that autopsy report of deceased shows as many as four entry and four exit wounds of fire arm with blackening & tattooing, which were sufficient for causing death which has been opined due to fire are injuries; that autopsy report indicates that firing was made on deceased from a close range; that applicant is not accused in murder trial of Mukesh, brother of deceased; that it alleged that since deceased Rakesh was doing parvi in murder case of his brother, he was shot dead by accused persons; that undisputably Aditya co-accused, brother of applicant was a person of criminal antecedent and due to his criminal antecedent applicant had disowned him in the year 2015 and also got it published in local newspaper "Dainik Janwani" that upon investigation charge sheet was filed against some of named accused for the main offence under Section 302 I.P.C., against applicant with the help of Section 120-B I.P..C.; that in statements of co-accused Piyush and Pradeep etc., applicant was assigned with the role of providing information with regard to movements and locations of deceased regarding which there is no incriminating evidence against applicant; that applicant neither handed any information report nor entered in criminal conspiracy for elimination of Rakesh; that applicant had no motive to cause death of deceased; that case of applicant is clearly distinguishable from co-accused persons and particularly from Aditya; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since

¶7

4.11.2018.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail.

¶9

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment 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.

¶10

Let the applicant Bittu Alias Chandravir be released on bail in Case Crime No. 528 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 120-B, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Seohara District Bijnor, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶11

(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.

¶12

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶14

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.

¶15

Order Date :- 18.2.2019 Md Faisal

Bittu Alias Chandravir v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bittu Alias Chandravir 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harendra Vs State of U.P.

Raju Baheliya Vs State of U.P.

Furkan Vs State of U.P.

Tej Pal Vs State of U.P.

Kewal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Purushottam Sharma @ Pandit Vs State of U.P.