Allowed

Upendra @ Uppa v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Dec 2021BAIL/17616/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On 21.12.2021, the Court allowed a bail application moved by Upendra @ Uppa in a runaway/firing case involving murder and robbery. The Court noted lack of recovery, no FIR naming, and prior acquittals, finding a case for bail made out without commenting on merits.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by execution of personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount subject to standard conditions.

Upendra @ Uppa Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17616 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Upendra @ Uppa Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Onkar Singh,Rajesh Yadav,Yadvesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

Heard over bail application moved by the applicant, Upendra @ Uppa, in Case Crime No. 382 of 2019, under Sections-302, 394 I.P.C. Police Station-Baraut, DistrictBaghpat.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA representing the State. Perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 27.06.2019; he is of criminal antecedents of 21 cases, which have been duly explained in accompanying affidavit; out of which in 12 cases there is judgment of acquittal and in two cases crime had refluxed; in remaining five cases he is on bail and implication is owing to enmity; in the present case, applicant was neither named in the First Information Report nor was there any recovery from him; rather, he was said to be apprehended in police firing case, wherein, he confessed about this guilt, but no such confession was ever made by the applicant; it is a false implication; nothing incriminating of this Case Crime Number was recovered from him; co-accused Rahul Kumar with similar degree of accusation has been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court, in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 46889 of 2020; there is no likelihood of applicant's fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case of release on bail; hence bail has been prayed for.

¶8

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed bail with this contention that the applicant is of 21 criminal antecedents.

¶9

Having heard learned counsel for both the parties, gone through the material placed on record it is apparent that

¶10

out of 21criminal antecedents, theres is acuqittal in 12 cases, in two cases there is no pendency, in other cases applicant is on bail; in the present case, neither the applicant has been named in the First Information Report nor there is recovery of any incriminating article from him; it is mere a confessional statement of accused made to police for this accusation; co-accused has been enlarged on bail, as above, and considering the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction but without commenting on the merits of the case, a case for bail is made out, accordingly allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant, Upendra @ Uppa , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶12

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶13

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶14

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶15

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶16

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 21.12.2021 Deepak/

Upendra @ Uppa v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Upendra @ Uppa 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

Sachin Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Anand Vs State of U.P.

Kunnu Yadav @ Navneet Yadav and 2 others Vs State of Up.

Mohammad Azad Vs State of U.P.

Monu Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Yadav Vs State of U.P.