Dismissed

Satya Alias Satpal Balmiki v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Nov 2020BAIL/1361/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant, accused in a murder case under Section 302 I.P.C., filed a bail application alleging innocence and sudden fight. The court rejected the bail prayer due to the serious nature of injuries and pgmrtm evidence, but directed the trial court to conclude the trial within six months.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; trial to be concluded within six months.

Satya Alias Satpal Balmiki Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1361 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Satya Alias Satpal Balmiki Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Shukla,Vivek Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anjani Kumar Raghuvanshi

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned AGA for the State.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no. 352 of 2018, under Sections 302, 307, 34, 452 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Kankarkhera, district-Meerut, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

The first information report was lodged by the complainant, alleging therein that the complainant was living as tenant in the house of the present accused for the last twelve years and the present accused wanted to get vacate his house from the complainant and due to this reason the relationship between complainant and the tenant was not good. It was also mentioned in the FIR that on 31.3.2018 at about 9:30 p.m. a scuffle took place between complainant and the present accused, in which present accused and his two sons Sachin and Akash caught hold the brother-in-law of the complainant and the present accused had given successive knife blows to him, caused fatal injuries, as a result of which he died.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some ulterior motive. He next submits that the incident was neither preplanned nor premeditated but was a result of sudden fight. There was no intention on the part of the accused to commit the murder of the deceased. He lastly submits that the applicant, who has no reported criminal antecedents to his credit and is in jail since 1.4.2018 is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.

¶9

Per contra learned counsel for the complainant and learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the present accused was having a knife in his hand and he has given successive knife blows on the vital part of the body of the deceased, caused serious injuries to him and as a result of which he died. The postmortem report of the deceased shows that the deceased has died due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of antemortem injuries, hence the applicant's prayer for bail is

¶10

liable to be rejected.

¶11

After having heard the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the nature of injuries on the person of the deceased and considering the evidence collected during investigation, this Court does not find it proper to release the applicant on bail.

¶12

The bail application is accordingly rejected.

¶13

However considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties after normal functioning of the Court as the Courts are not normally functioning due to pandemic COVID-19.

¶14

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by learned counsel for the applicant along with a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶15

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶16

Order Date :- 4.11.2020 Faridul

Satya Alias Satpal Balmiki v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satya Alias Satpal Balmiki 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

Manorav @ Saurabh Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Arvind Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Jaysawal Vs State of U.P.

Kavita Vs State of U.P.