This is a bail application filed for murder under Section 304 IPC. The applicant argued false implication and lack of motive. The court found it a fit case for bail at this stage without engaging in merits.
Applicant released on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and specific undertaking 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. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9346 of 2019
Applicant :- Avanish Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Neelabh Srivastava,Sumit Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Vakalatnama filed by Sri Om Narayan Pandey, Advocate on behalf of first informant today in the Court, is taken on record.
Heard Sri Neelabh Srivastava, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Om Narayan Pandey, learned counsel for first informant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant has been falsely implicated; that as per averments made in F.I.R. lodged with inordinate delay on 12.12.2018 by Smt. Vimla Devi, her husband Vikram was a confectioner/halwai and few days back on some altercation with his worker Avanish, which matter was sub-sided, on 2.12.2018 at 4:00 p.m. her husband was fetched by applicant and co-accused persons and did not return for two days and upon search, dead body of her husband was found towards South of bushes on Puwaya Road Bhaisi River Bridge at about 7:30 a.m. on 5.12.2018 and upon post mortem of body, 3-4 injuries were found on the person of deceased; that as per post mortem report cause of death is shock and haemorrhage due to ante mortem injuries; that inquest report of body of deceased was prepared at the instance of his brother Shrawan Kumar between 11:15 a.m. to 12:00 in noon on 5.12.2018, in which apart from Shrawan Kumar, another brother of deceased Pawan, is one of the Panch witness and apart from clothes, a sum of Rs.5,895/- was found in the pocket of deceased; that in post mortem report probable time of death was mentioned as 3- 4 days back; that it is wrong to say that applicant fetched deceased in the evening of 2.12.2018; that there is no whisper in the inquest report putting finger of suspicion on applicant and there is no missing report, while deceased was allegedly missing since 03 days, and two brothers of deceased were Panch witnesses of inquest report; that F.I.R. has been lodged with false and concocted allegations upon deliberations with inordinate delay of 07 days; that there is no incriminating evidence against applicant, except his confessional statement in police custody, which is not admissible in evidence; that applicant had no motive to cause death of deceased; that
applicant has been falsely implicated on account of suspicion; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 9.1.2019.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for first informant vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and contended that since applicant was working with deceased as Halwai and since he used to come back after few days, so there was no need for lodging missing report and initially no suspicion was made on applicant; that applicant has confessed of crime in his statement before Investigating Officer about giving of multiple blows to deceased, after altercations over drinking of liquor.
Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering 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.
Let applicant Avanish Kumar be released on bail in Case Crime No.598 of 2018, under Sections 304 I.P.C., P.S. Banda, District Shahjahanpur on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with 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 :- 6.3.2019 Tamang
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in the maintenance of criminal crossAxisAlignment 304 IPC.
Avanish Kumar
Harsh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
