Allowed

Reenoo and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Jan 2020BAIL/3558/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of Reenoo and Anand Yadav, accused of murder and forgery under the IPC. The court held that despite the severity of the offence, the applicants deserve bail without commenting on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence and cooperating with trial.

Reenoo and Another Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3558 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Reenoo And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwani Kumar Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Heard learned Counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

Accused-applicants, involved in Case Crime No. 497 of 2018, under Sections 201, 120(B), 389, 419, 182, 194 IPC, Police Station Campearganj, District Gorakhpur, applied for bail.

¶7

Brief facts of the prosecution case, need to be noted for disposal of bail application are;

¶8

One Indrajeet Chaurasiya, village Pradhan submitted a written tehrir before station officer Camperganj, District Gorakhpur stating that on 28.11.2018 at about 8.00 pm he came to know that a dead body of unknown female is lying in the bushes near nala. He went to spot and saw that a dead body of one female aged about 20-22 years was lying there and there was a rope in the neck. It appears that she was murdered and thrown in the bushes. On the basis of written tehrir submitted by informant a case under Section 302, 201 IPC bearing crime no. 497 of 2018 was registered in the police station concerned. Post mortem of the dead body was done as unknown lady. Later on dead body of unknown lady was recognized as Reenoo daughter of Ram Dulare village Madhopur her daughter in law Indrajeet Chaurasiya and her sister Leelavati who took that dead body in their possession. Matter was investigated by Investigating Officer that alleged Reenoo is alive and her family member i.e., her mother, her brother in law, her sister, her husband and she herself demanded Rs. 10 Lacs from one Ram Sajan showing that Reenoo was kidnapped and murdered by Gayanand son of Ram Sajan whereas Reenoo was alive.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. They have committed no offence. Prosecution story is false and fake. Applicants are husband and wife. They have not identified the body of the deceased Reenoo, dead body of Reenoo is said to have been identified by other accused. Applicants have no

¶10

concern with the present case, they have neither demanded any money from anyone nor conceal any evidence. Applicants are in jail since 15.05.2019. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicants fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case, the applicants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Due to heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no possibility of early conclusion of the trial.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that accused applicant as well as other co-accused persons wrongly identified the dead body of alleged Reenoo and lodged a forged report regarding murder of Reenoo, demanded ransom from one Ram Sajan.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, rival contention of learned counsel for the parties, detention of applicant in jail, severity of punishment in case of conviction and without commenting upon the merit of the case, applicant deserves bail.

¶13

Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let applicants Reenoo and Aanand Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties and filing an undertaking to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶15

The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶16

The applicants shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶17

During trial, they shall not indulge in any criminal activities or case.

¶18

In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶19

Order Date :- 23.1.2020 Ujjawal

Reenoo and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reenoo and Another 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

Imran Khan Vs State of U.P.

Shriram Vs State of U.P.

Rinku and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Sharan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manna Alias Rahman Vs State of U.P.

Ajam Vs State of U.P.