Allowed

Satyapal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2021BAIL/3293/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted bail to an accused charged with culpable homicide. The FIR was lodged belatedly without an eye-witness account, and the alleged eye-witness denied seeing the occurrence. The court held it was a fit case for bail despite prosecution opposition.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on personal bond and two sureties with conditions against criminal activity, tampering with evidence, pressurizing witnesses, and attendance at trial court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3293 of 2021

¶3

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

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chand,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for applicant(s), learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application has been preferred by the accusedapplicant(s), Satyapal, who is involved in Case Crime No. 168 of 2020, under Section 304 I.P.C. P.S.- Bisauli, DistrictBudaun.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the FIR of this case is belated by nine days. There is no eye witness account of the occurrence. As per FIR case the alleged eye witness Chhotey Lal has not supported the prosecution case. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.06.2020 and has no criminal antecedents as averred in para-15 of the affidavit.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and contended that the witnesses have stated that they have come to know that the fighting was going on in between the deceased and accused person.

¶9

As per FIR case, the informant has lodged the FIR that her son Raj Kumar had gone for walk on 13.06.2020 at 4 O'clock and she got the information from one Deepak that her son Raj Kumar was lying in an injured condition under the jackfruit tree in orchard of Sanjay Agarwal. He was rushed to PHC Bisauli and from there he was referred to District Hospital, Budaun and during treatment he succumbed to his injuries. Later on this fact come to know that Satyapal and Ramesh had caused the death of her son Raj Kumar by assaulting him with lathi and danda . This occurrence was also seen by Chhotey Lal of the village.

¶10

The statement of Chhotey Lal recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. is annexed at page 39 of the affidavit, which transpires that he has not seen the occurrence and he was also not acquainted with Raj Kumar deceased. As per postmortem report, ten injuries were mentioned and the cause of death has been stated to be shock and haemorrhage due to ante mortem

¶11

injuries.

¶12

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and going through the record, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶13

Let applicant(s), Satyapal , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

(i) The applicant(s) shall not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶15

(ii) The applicant(s) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶16

(iii) The applicant(s) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶17

(iv) The applicant(s) shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.

¶18

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, liberty is given to the trial court to cancel the bail of the applicant(s) without any reference to this Court.

¶19

Order Date :- 19.1.2021 Prajapati

Satyapal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyapal 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

Jameel Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jai Prakash Maurya Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Vs State of U.P.

Abhimannu Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Vimla Devi Vs State of U.P.