Allowed

Ram Prakash v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Jun 2021BAIL/31713/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under Sections 304, 323, and 504 IPC, the court, considering the accused involvement in an altercation causing death via beatings with lathi and danda, granted bail contingent on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, with strict conditions regarding trial cooperation and non-tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to cooperate in trial and not tamper with evidence.

Ram Prakash Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31713 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Prakash Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chakshuvendra Pachauri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant is virtually connected through video conferencing and learned A.G.A. is personally present.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant Ram Prakash with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 243 of 2020, under Sections 304, 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Beesalpur, District Pilibhit.

¶8

The first information report has been lodged against three named persons with the allegation that they committed maarpeet with the nephew of the informant who sustained injuries and subsequently died in the hospital.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Submission is that the postmortem report reveals that the injured sustained two injuries, out of which one is on the head and by shock and hemorrhage due to ante-mortem injuries, the deceased died. Further submission is that the number of injuries are only two, which was caused by blunt object, whereas three persons have been named in the first information report. There is only general allegations against all the accused persons. The accused-applicant is prepared to furnish the surety and bond and is giving undertaking that he will cooperate in trial. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the

¶10

applicant has no previous criminal history and there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant has been in jail since 23.05.2020, hence, he is entitled to bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. He has further submitted that after investigation, the police has already filed charge sheet in the matter. This fact has not been denied by learned A.G.A. that the deceased has suffered only two injuries of blunt object.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also the fact that the alleged maar-peet has been taken place by use of lathi and danda and no deadly weapon has been used in the commission of the offence. There is general allegation against the accused-applicant, hence, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that applicant is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A

¶14

I.P.C.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 25.6.2021 sailesh

Ram Prakash v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Prakash 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

Santosh Kumar Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.

Trimal Vs State of U.P.

Lalmati Devi Vs State of U.P.

Sanjeev Kumar Baranwal Vs State of Up and Another

Suraj Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Akram Vs State of U.P.