Allowed

Badaku Alias Manish v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2021BAIL/4176/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court granted bail to Badaku Alias Manish in a murder case under Section 302 IPC. The court accepted arguments that the accusation might be baseless and no motive existed, imposing a personal bond with strict conditions to ensure appearance in trial and prevent identification tampering.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on personal bond and two sureties in the like amount with conditions for attendance and evidence preservation.

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

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4176 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Badaku Alias Manish Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Shanker Pandey,Himanshu Kumar,Subhash Chandra Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Badaku Alias Manish seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 192 of 2017, under Section(s) 302 I.P.C. registered at P.S.- Sajeti, District- Kanpur Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant and only general allegations have been made. Contention is that the P.W.1 is not a prompt witness as it is clear from the perusal of the F.I.R. and from the case diary. Further submission is that there is no eye witness account of the alleged incident and the naming of the applicant is false and baseless. It is also stated that the accused had neither any previous enmity with the deceased nor he had any motive to kill the deceased. Further contention is that the presence of the accused at the place of occurrence is highly doubtful as the distance of his house from the alleged incident is about 9 kms. It is also argued that from perusal of the statement of the informant it is evident that co-accused Aijaj had business of slaughtering the cows and the deceased used to threaten the co-accused Aijaj for police about his business. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents as stated in para19 of the affidavit and is in jail since September, 2018.

¶8

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Let the applicant- Badaku Alias Manish, 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:-

¶11

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

¶12

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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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 229A IPC.

¶16

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

¶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

The bail application is allowed.

¶19

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶20

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶21

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶22

Order Date :- 22.2.2021 shiv

Badaku Alias Manish v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Badaku Alias Manish 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

Surendra Rao Vs State of U.P.

Harendra Alias B.P. Vs The State of U.P.

Nandan Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.

Bal Chandra Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.

Nirdosh Vs State of U.P.