Allowed

Balram Patel v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Feb 2020BAIL/5998/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was examined where the accused faced charges of murder and conspiracy. The court found no direct evidence or physical recovery linking the accused to the crime, noting reliance on suspicion and one co-accused's confession. Considering the lack of tangible incriminating evidence and parity with released co-accused, the court treated the case as a fit

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions regarding court attendance and conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5998 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Balram Patel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Babu Lal Ram Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Babu Lal Ram, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This Bail Application (under Section 439 Cr.P.C.) has been moved for seeking bail in Case Crime No. 388 of 2019, under Sections 302, 201 & 34 I.P.C., P.S. G.R.P. Allahabad, District Prayagraj.

¶7

As per the F.I.R., which has been lodged by the Station Master, Jhunsi against unknown person after finding the dead body of the deceased on 31.07.2019, says nothing against the accused applicant.

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the accused applicant that the name of the accused applicant has come into light in the statement of one Mulayam Patel before whom, extra judicial confession is said to have been made by the accused-applicant that he along with two other co-accused Jitendra Kumar Patel and Suraj Kumar Vishwakarma had strangulated the victim who is sister of the accused applicant and also stated that he had seen on 23.07.2019 at 09:30 to 10:30 PM, the accused applicant in company of the deceased along with other co-accused. It is further pointed out that the other co-villager Harish Chand Pal had stated that the deceased was of loose character who had fled with many other persons which led bad name to her and she was in love with one Manish Bhartiya with whom she wanted to flee. It is further pointed out that mother of the deceased had also stated that the victim had earlier fled with so many others and she was of bad character. It is argued in the light of these statement that only on the basis of the suspicion, the applicant being brother of the deceased has been implicated falsely and sole statement against him is that of extra judicial confession alleged to have

¶9

been made by him before Mulayam Patel and no other evidence is available on record linking the applicant with the commission of offence. No recovery of any incriminating article has been made either from his possession or at his pointing out. It has further been submitted that co-accused Jitendra Kumar Patel and Suraj Kumar Vishwakarma having identical role have already been released on bail vide orders dated 6.1.2020 and 31.01.2020 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 55494 of 2019 and Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.4336 of 2020 respectively, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. He has no criminal history. The accused applicant is in jail since 01.09.2019, if the accused is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail but has not controverted the aforesaid facts. Looking to the fact that there is no direct evidence against the accused applicant, it appears that only on the ground of suspicion, the applicant has been made an accused in this case. No recovery of any incriminating article has been made either from his possession or at his pointing out. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, this case is found to be a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant Balram Patel involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶12

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

¶13

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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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

¶16

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 229-A 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 :- 19.2.2020

¶22

Asha

¶23

(Samit Gopal,J.)

Balram Patel v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balram Patel 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

Azad Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Bhim Sen Vs State of U.P.

Anit @ Tota Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Vs State of U.P.

Ram Sewak Yadav Vs State of U.P.