Allowed

Vipin v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Feb 2020BAIL/6272/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench allowed the bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a murder case where the applicant claimed false implication. The court granted bail subject to specific conditions regarding attendance, tampering with evidence, and the issuance of proclamations for absence.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding attendance, evidence tampering, and prohibition of abuse of liberty.

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

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6272 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Vipin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Pati Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Anand Pati Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant, Vipin , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 609 of 2019, under Section 302 I.P.C., registered at P.S. Dibiyapur, District Auraiya.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the F.I.R has been registered by chachi of the deceased and the present applicant. The dead body was recovered in the house of the first informant Smt. Pinky. As per the F.I.R there is a clear recital that the deceased Kumari Priyanka who was a mentally challenged girl hung herself with a Sari from the hook of the fan, an information was given to her family members who then took her to the doctor where she was declared dead. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. There is no cogent and reliable evidence against the applicant. The applicant is the brother of the deceased. The recovery of an alleged Sari on his pointing out is completely fabricated and planted recovery as the F.I.R gives a recital itself that the deceased hung herself with a Sari from the clamp of ceiling fan and she was then taken to the doctor and as such there was no occasion to take the said Sari & conceal it. The applicant is in jail since 18.11.2019.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Let the applicant, Vipin, 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:-

¶10

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

¶11

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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

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

¶16

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. Order Date :- 25.2.2020 AS Rathor

¶17

(Samit Gopal,J.)

Vipin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vipin 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

Zakir Vs State of U.P.

Rajmangal Vs State of U.P.

Achchhe Hasan @ Najmul Hasan Vs State of U.P.

Smt Armana Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Vs State of U.P.

Rubi Alias Upasana Vs State of U.P.