Santosh Patel Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 16

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4482 of 2020

Applicant :- Santosh Patel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar, Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

Sri Ravi Pal Singh, Advocate files his Vakalatnama on behalf of the informant which is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Santosh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the first informant, learned A.G.A. and perused the material on record.

¶7

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Santosh Patel seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 756 of 2019, under Sections 302, 201, 404 & 120-B I.P.C., registered at P.S. Nawabganj, District Allahabad.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the First Information Report was lodged on 21.10.2019 at about 15:40 hrs by Rakesh Kumar stating therein that his brother Vinay Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar aged about 21 years was taken by Satyam and Sakeel Yadav on 20.10.2019 at about 7:00 P.M. who did not return back. A search was conducted, and subsequently, on 21.10.2019 at about 1:30 P.M. his dead body was found in the paddy field of Ram Pratap and his cloths were lying on the road in front of the grove of Ram Pratap. It is further mentioned that the first informant has a firm belief that the murdered has been committed by Satyam, Sakeel and their companion Santosh Patel, the present applicant and after murder they have tried to conceal the dead body.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argues on the strength of paragraph 14 of the affidavit that the evidence as coming forward against him is that of last seen only and that too in the statement of Kanchan, the sister of the deceased which was recorded on 15.11.2019. The said statement was recorded after about 25 days of the occurrence. He further argues that there is no recovery of any incriminating material either from the possession of the applicant or from his pointing out. He further argued that the applicant is in jail since 25.10.2019 having no criminal history to his credit.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA as well as the learned counsel for the first informant oppose the prayer for bail and argued that there is evidence of last seen in the statement of Kanchan, the sister of the deceased and the recovery of a kulahari and Vivo phone of the deceased on the pointing out of co-accused Abhishek Yadav but could not dispute the aforesaid arguments as raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Considering the totality of the case in particular, nature of evidence available on record without further any comments on merit, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant Santosh Patel, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶16

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.

¶17

(V) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A IPC.

¶18

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶19

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶20

The bail application is allowed.

¶21

Order Date :- 13.2.2020 M. ARIF

¶22

(Samit Gopal, J.)

Santosh Patel v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Patel v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naseer @ Lal Badshah Vs State of U.P.

Astabhuja Singh Vs State of U.P.

Rizwan Vs State of U.P.

Anil Kumar @ Munshi Dhuriya Vs State of U.P.

Ajeet Vs State of U.P.

Brajmohan Singh @ Bijju Vs State of U.P.