Allowed

Nirdosh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2021BAIL/8864/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a bail application filed by an accused charged with murder. The accused argued false implication and claimed parity with a co-accused released on bail. The Court found no convincing material suggesting tampering with evidence and granted bail subject to strict conditions regarding court attendance, evidence preservation, and appearance at critical trial stages.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8864 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Nirdosh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sriram Dhar Dubey,Brijesh Pratap Mishra,Gaurav Chauhan,Kuldeep Saxena,Vijit Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Sriram Dhar Dubey, 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 Nirdosh , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 693 of 2018, under Section 302, 201 I.P.C. registered at P.S.- Majhola, District Moradabad.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Only on the basis of circumstantial evidence the accused was implicated. It is further submitted that skeleton and cloths of the deceased Munni Devi was recovered on pointing out of the co-accused Sunil who has already been released on bail by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 3864 of 2019 on 28.01.2019. There is no forensic or scientific evidence to prove the fact that the recovered skeleton was of deceased Munni Devi. It is argued that the case of the applicant is on the better footing of the co-accused Sunil who has been granted bail and claims parity. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and is in jail since 15.07.2018.

¶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- Nirdosh 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

¶11

concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶12

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

¶13

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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

The bail application is allowed.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

Order Date :- 22.2.2021

¶24

RPD

Nirdosh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirdosh 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.

Badaku Alias Manish Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.