Allowed

Vinod Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Sept 2020BAIL/55745/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 304 IPC, the Court granted bail to the applicant despite fratricide allegations. The Court relied on the postmortem report indicating natural death due to cardiac arrest with no injuries. Bail was granted subject to conditions including execution of a personal bond and furnishing sureties, with a caveat regarding the pending affidavit.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail upon executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties, subject to conditions including no tampering with evidence.

Vinod Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55745 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vindhyachal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

¶5

This application has been entertained without an affidavit on account of the extraordinary contingency created by the Covid19 pandemic where the travel is restricted. This Court notices the fact that there is a declaration by the applicant that he will file an affidavit. This order is being passed, therefore, subject to a certain conditions in this regard.

¶6

This is an application for bail on behalf of the applicant, Vinod Kumar in connection with Case Crime No. 333 of 2019, under Section 304 IPC, Police Station Sachendi, District Kanpur Nagar.

¶7

Heard Sri Vindhyachal Singh, learned Counsel for the applicant, and the learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State.

¶8

The submission of the learned Counsel for the applicant is that he has been implicated in the present crime baselessly by his brother indicting him of fratricide, on account of extraneous considerations. It is submitted that the applicant's father died a natural death on account of cardiac arrest (Myocardial Infarction), as would be evident from a perusal of the postmortem report. It is also pointed out that the postmortem report does not record any injury sustained by the deceased. In fact, there is a specific remark in the autopsy report which says "no external injury seen". The entire story of the applicant

¶9

beating his father while the informant was away, is belied by the autopsy report where the cause of death, in the submission of learned counsel for the applicant, is ex facie a natural death due to cardiac arrest. It is submitted that the informant has falsely implicated the applicant in order to disinherit him. It is asserted that the applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 16.08.2019.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the gravity of the offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, in particular, the fact that there is absolutely no injury sustained by the deceased, prima facie consistent with the prosecution, the fact that the cause of death shown in the autopsy report is cardiac arrest (Myocardial Infarction), the fact that prima facie it appears to be a case of natural death and not homicide, the fact that the informant is a brother of the applicant between whom, there appears to be some issues relating to property, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court, finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶12

The bail application, accordingly, stands allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant, Vinod Kumar in connection with Case Crime No. 333 of 2019, under Section 304 IPC, Police Station Sachendi, District Kanpur Nagar, be released on bail on executing his personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

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

¶15

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution

¶16

witnesses.

¶17

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the Trial Court.

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

(vi) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶21

(vii) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶22

(viii) 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.

¶23

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the prosecution would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.

¶24

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. It is further clarified that the Trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led, unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶25

It is made clear that in case, an affidavit in support of this application duly sworn is not filed, as declared, within 15 days of resumption of swearing of affidavits, the bail granted to the applicant shall be cancelled. Order Date :- 23.9.2020 NSC

Vinod Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Km. Sangeeta (Corpus) Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Smt. Dev Kumari and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Soniya Sharma Alias Soniya and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Vivek Tomar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Umesh Vs State of U.P.

Akash Vs State of U.P.