Allowed

Kamal and 02 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Feb 2020BAIL/4673/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to applicants charged with murder. The court imposed strict conditions regarding attendance, tampering with evidence, and adherence to court orders, requiring a personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicants were released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to eight specific conditions.

Kamal and 02 Others Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4673 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Kamal And 02 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Alok Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama filed by Sri Alok Singh on behalf of the first informant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri K.K. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the first informant and the learned A.G.A. and perused the records.

¶7

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicants, Kamal, Mohan Lal and Ram Niwas Others, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 145 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 34 & 120-B I.P.C., registered at P.S. Kheragarh, District Agra.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no other evidence to show that the applicants were instrumental in committing the murder of Shyamvir and Kumari Pooja. The deceased (Shyamvir) along with Kumari Pooja was murdered by the relatives of Shyamvir due to some dispute regarding the relationship between them which was not relished by them. The present case no doubt is a case of honour killing but there is no evidence to connect the applicants in the present matter except for the extra-judicial confession of the applicants before Raghunath Singh, the Village Pradhan. There is no other evidence. A cross F.I.R was registered as Case Crime No. 248 of 2019 under Sections at P.S. Kheragarh, District Agra on 04.11.2019 by Bhagwan Singh on the basis of an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. for the same incident under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 302, 504, 506 I.P.C. He further argued that the dead bodies as received by doctor conducting post mortem examination were not in a sealed condition as noted in both the post mortem reports. It has further been argued that the recovery of a gamcha on the pointing out of the applicant no. 1, Kamal has not been connected till date with the present incident. There is no recovery from the other applicants. The applicants are in jail since 28.06.2019 have no criminal history.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A and the counsel for the complainant argued that as per the instructions received by him in Case Crime No. 248 of 2019 a final report has been forwarded by the Investigating Officer. The applicants are involved in the present matter and the bail application thus deserves to be dismissed but could not dispute the arguments as raised by the learned counsel for the applicants.

¶10

Let the applicant, Kamal, Mohan Lal and Ram Niwas , 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:-

¶11

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

¶12

ii) The applicants 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.

¶13

(iii) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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.

¶14

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

¶15

(V) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A IPC.

¶16

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

¶17

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 applicants to prison.

¶18

Order Date :- 6.2.2020 AS Rathor

¶19

(Samit Gopal,J.)

Kamal and 02 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamal and 02 Others 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

Jeetu Vs State of U.P.

Ganesh Prasad Agrahari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kaku Alias Parikshit Bhardwaj Vs State of U.P.

Deepak @ Shiv Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Shashikant @ Chunchun Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Megh Singh Vs State of U.P.