Allowed

Rammohan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2020BAIL/5164/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Bench allowed a bail application filed by Rammohan in a murder case. The court released him on bail subject to specific conditions regarding appearance, non-tampering with evidence, and attendance at trial stages.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with a personal bond and two sureties upon furnishing an undertaking to comply with specific conditions of appearance and non-interference.

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

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5164 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rammohan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, 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 Rammohan seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with case crime no.294 of 2019, under Sections 302, 452 and 34 I.P.C., P.S. Ganjdundwara, District Kasganj.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the incident in the present matter is alleged to have taken place in between 09.09.2019 night and 10.09.2019 at 1.00 A.M. for which first information report was registered on 10.09.2019 at about 5.32 A.M. By Omveer Singh. As per the first information report, Teetu-the deceased, who is brother of the first informant took his dinner and went to sleep on the roof of the house. Subsequently at around at 1.00 A.M. on hearing two fire shots the first informant and other persons woke up and saw that Teetu received injuries and has died. First information report was lodged against unknown person.

¶9

He further argued that the applicant is not named in the first information report. There is no recovery of any incriminating material either from the pointing out or from the possession of

¶10

the applicant. Recovery of one countrymade pistol each was affected from co-accused Rakesh and Omveer. In the statement of Shishpal and Brahmanand alleged witnesses recorded on 16.10.2019 the applicant has been named as one of the accused persons. He further states that said statement has been recorded after one month six days of the incident just in order to implicate falsely the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 16.10.2019 and has no criminal antecedents as stated in para-18 of the affidavit, therefore, he be released on bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA opposes the bail but could not dispute the arguments advanced on behalf of the applicant.

¶12

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.

¶13

Let the applicant Rammohan 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:-

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

(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

¶17

abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

The bail application is allowed.

¶23

Order Date :- 10.2.2020

¶24

Asha

¶25

(Samit Gopal,J.)

Rammohan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rammohan 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

Geeta Devi Vs State of U.P.

Ranjeet Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Hori @ Hori Lal Vs State of U.P.

Firoz Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Kumar Vs State of U.P.