Allowed

Bheem v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Nov 2020BAIL/39598/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 and 302 IPC arising from a land dispute incident involving casualties on both sides, the High Court grant bail during trial despite severe charges, noting the difficulty in ascertaining aggressors.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on bail by executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each, subject to conditions of attending trial and not tampering with witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39598 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Bheem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Charan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 221 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506 and 302 I.P.C., P.S. Khutahan, district-Jaunpur, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

The first information of the incident was lodged by the complainant Ninhoo against six persons including present accused on 23.8.2020, alleging therein that accused persons attacked the complainant side over the dispute of a piece of land when the prosecution side was digging foundation for constructions. It was also mentioned in the FIR that when the complainant side resisted, the accused persons after hurling abuses, started assaulting the complainant side with lathi-danda and rods, causing serious injuries to Jiyalal, Ram Khelawan and Indu. Later on, injured Jiyalal succumbed to the injuries.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is also a cross version of the incident. The date and time of incident in both the FIRs are same. Two persons died from the side of the prosecution, while one person died and two persons received serious injuries from the side of the defense, which the prosecution has not been able to explain. It is apparent that the prosecution has not come up with clean hands and it is difficult to ascertain at this stage as to which party is the aggressor. He next submits that the applicant who has no criminal antecedents to his credit and is in jail since 23.8.2020, is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of trial.

¶9

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the

¶11

accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, considering that the incident had occurred at the spur of moment and both the side have suffered casualties and injuries and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.

¶12

Let the applicant, Bheem be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶14

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶15

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶16

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶18

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.

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 20.11.2020 Faridul

Bheem v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bheem 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

Sadakat Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sirajuddin Vs State of U.P. and Another

Firoz @ Chhote Vs State of U.P.

Vindesh Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Alias Manu Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another