Allowed

Prem Narain Lodhi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Mar 2019BAIL/9848/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal court allowed bail application filed by Prem Narain Lodhi accused under Sections 302, 304 IPC in an assault-cum-death case. Applications argued innocence and lack of independent evidence against applicant, granting bail on standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each subject to conditions to appear in court and not tamper with evidence.

Prem Narain Lodhi Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9848 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Prem Narain Lodhi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Arun Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Mishra, learned brief holder for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against four accused persons, namely Prem Narain Lodhi, Hemendra, Smt. Mannu and Reema alleging that on 15.11.2017 they assaulted Rajdhar with lathi-danda and sabbal, he received six injuries, one on chest resultantly died. Specific role of assault was assigned to co-accused Hemendra with sabbal on his chest and sabbal was recovered from the possession of co-accused Hemendra.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. There are general allegations against all accused persons except co-accused Hemendra. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. Main role was assigned to coaccused Hemendra. The case of applicant is distinguishable from co-accused Hemendra. There is no possibility to get this case decided in short period in future. He is languishing in jail since 18.11.2017 (more than one year and two months) 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.

¶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 Prem Narain Lodhi involved in Case Crime No. 349 of 2017, under Sections 302, 323, 504, 34 IPC, Police Station Jariya, District Hamirpur be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the

¶11

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 :- 7.3.2019

¶19

A. Singh

Prem Narain Lodhi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Narain Lodhi 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

Anand Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Amir Vs State of U.P.

Savej @ Shevi Vs State of U.P.

Sabir Vs State of U.P.

Anil Bind Vs State of U.P.

Sameer Vs State of U.P.