Allowed

Shailendra Tiwari v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Jan 2020BAIL/3926/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the bail application of Shailendra Tiwari in a murder case (Sections 302/34, 120-B IPC). Despite the gravity of the offence, the court noted the existence of parity in bail for co-accused and the lack of direct evidence/motive against the applicant, finding it a fit case for bail.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties subject to specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 54

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3926 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Shailendra Tiwari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Moeez Uddin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Shailendra Tiwari in connection with Case Crime No.144 of 2019, under Sections 302/34, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Bisanda, District Banda.

¶7

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. The applicant is not named in the first information report. It is further submitted that nobody has seen the incidence. There is no circumstantial evidence against the applicant. The first information report has been lodged against unknown persons. It is further submitted that name of the applicant came into light in the statement of co-accused Dileep @ Banta and Kallu Shukla recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as a suspected accused. There is no motive assigned against the applicant. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that this is a case of transferred malice as provided under Section 301 Cr.P.C. and the name of the applicant was surfaced on the basis of confessional statement, although no recovery has been made from the applicant. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that coaccused Karan Dube @ Parasu Ram Dube and Sumit Tiwari had already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 17.1.2020 and 18.11.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2156 of 2020 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 49385 of 2019 respectively. It is lastly submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.10.2019 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea. However, learned A.G.A. does not dispute the factum of parity.

¶9

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused and

¶10

also the fact that the aforesaid co-accused have been admitted to the concession of bail by this Court, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Shailendra Tiwari involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶14

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;

¶15

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶16

iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;

¶17

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

Order Date :- 28.1.2020 Noman

Shailendra Tiwari v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailendra Tiwari 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Babu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vipin Sharma @ Vaibhav Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Shahzad Vs State of U.P.

Rayal Yadav and 2 Otehrs Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhikhari Alias Bheekam Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.