High Court allowed bail to an applicant charged under Sections 147, 148, and 304 IPC for death, finding sufficient materials for bail release.
Bail granted on execution of personal bond and two sureties each.
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. - 93
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22081 of 2020
Applicant :- Bhupesh @ Bholu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Mishra,Prakash Chandra Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Santosh Kumar Singh,Vivek Kumar Srivastava,Yogendra Pal Singh
Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
Sri Yogendra Pal Singh, Advocate has filed counter affidavit on behalf of the informant today in the Court, which is taken on record. Another counsel Sri Vivek Kumar Srivastava has also appeared on behalf of the informant and submitted that his counter affidavit is under preparation. It is not clear as to whom the informant has engaged his counsel.
Sri Yogendra Pal Singh, Advocate has submitted that because he has filed Vakalatnama today on the instructions of the informant, he has no information that Sri Vivek Kumar Srivastava is also appearing in this case.
From perusal of the counter affidavit filed by Sri Yogendra Pal Singh, it appears that the latest information given by the informant in this case is to Sri Yogendra Pal Singh who has filed counter affidavit on his behalf.
In the said counter affidavit, no new ground has been taken nor any specific role has been assigned to the applicant.
Heard Sri Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State as well as Sri Yogendra Pal Singh and Sri Vivek Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.
Applicant has moved the present bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No.16 of 2020 under Section 147, 148, 304 IPC P.S. Ganganagar District Meerut.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the applicant was not named in the FIR and he has been nominated in the present case on the basis of the information of the Mukhbir. No specific role has been assigned against the
applicant in the FIR. It is also submitted that when the applicant was passing through the road side, he found the deceased lying in injured condition whereafter the applicant tried to save him and with the help of pubic and the friends of the deceased, the applicant got him admitted in hospital. There is no independent witness to the alleged incident. Nothing has been recovered from the possession or on the pointing out of the applicant.
Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It has also been pointed out that the accused is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 31.1.2020 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail.
After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let the applicant Bhupesh @ Bholu involved in Case Crime No.16 of 2020 under Section 147, 148, 304 IPC P.S. Ganganagar District Meerut be released on bail on executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-
(1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.
(2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date
fixed in the court below and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.
(3) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(4) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
(5)The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.
(6) 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
It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
Order Date :- 28.9.2020 SP
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a murder case alleging accidental death and false implication.
Whether the absence of conviction history and likelihood of early conclusion supports bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and anotherReferred¶15
Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Bhupesh @ Bholu
State of U.P.
Shamim Ahmed
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Shamim Ahmed
Parties & counsel
