Dismissed

Abhay Verma v. State of U.P. Thru Home Secy. Lucknow

Allahabad HC18 May 2022/14644/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the court rejected the plea for bail. The applicant, charged with murder under Section 302/34 IPC with a long criminal history, repeatedly sought adjournments on grounds of ill health, but the case was peremptorily listed and decided ex-parte, resulting in the rejection of bail due to the heinous nature of the offense.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; accused Applicant not enlarged on bail.

Abhay Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru Home Secy… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 12

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14644 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Abhay Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Home Secy. Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Bhola Singh Patel,Pawan Kumar Jaiswal,Pravin Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail in Case Crime No.368 of 2019, under Section 302/34 IPC, Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow.

¶7

For the last three dates, learned counsel for the accusedapplicant has been seeking adjournments on the ground of his ill health. On 29.4.2022, considering the request of the learned counsel for the accused-applicant for adjournment of the case, the case was directed to be listed in the next cause list peremptorily. Again on 10.5.2022 though the case was listed peremptorily, but the counsel for the accused-applicant sought adjournment on the ground of his ill health and, therefore, the case was directed to be listed peremptorily in the next cause list. Today, again the case is listed peremptorily, but the learned counsel for the accused-applicant has sought adjournment on the ground of his ill health. As the matter is listed peremptorily, there is no question of accommodating the request of the learned counsel for the accused-applicant to adjourn the case

¶8

and, therefore, with the assistance of Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned AGA, the case is being decided ex-parte.

¶9

The accused-applicant is accused of killing the deceased, Chotu on 18.5.2019 at around 9.15 PM. There are several independent eye witnesses, who have seen the occurrence and identified the accused-applicant as one of the assailants, who committed the murder of the deceased, Chotu.

¶10

Post-mortem report of the deceased would disclose the following ante-mortem injuries on his body:-

¶11

"1. Fire arm wound of entry 1.5 cm x 1.5 cm c brain cavity deep present on back of head at occipital region, 12 cm above C7 spine, blackening and tatooing present on around the wound, margins inverted and irregular.

¶12

2. On opening echymosis present underneath the injury occipital bone fractured, margins cuts and brain matter lesasted.

¶13

3. Subdural hematoma present all over the brain, x-ray done in KGMU mortury in 4 plate on metallic bullet seen in x-ray and recovered from Lt. Angle of mouth buccal cavity.”

¶14

Cause of death was due to ante-mortem fire arm injury on the head of the deceased. Accused-applicant has long criminal history of 18 cases, including the present one, under the Arms Act, Gangsters Act and under Sections 457, 380, 411, 392, 398 and 307 IPC.

¶15

Considering the heinousness of offence, cold blooded murder of the deceased by the accused-applicant and other co-accused, and also the long criminal history of the accused-applicant, this Court does not find any ground to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail.

¶16

Bail application is accordingly rejected.

¶17

Order Date :- 18.5.2022 Rao/-

¶18

Digitally signed by CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO Date: 2022.05.19 13:43:37 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Abhay Verma v. State of U.P. Thru Home Secy. Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhay Verma v. State of U.P. Thru Home Secy. Lucknow

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

Keshav Saroj @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mohd. Fakrey @ Mohd. Khursheed Alam Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt.and 3 Others

Sanjeet (Second Bail) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home and 3 Others

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of Uttar Pradesh through Principal Secretary Home, Civil Secretariat, Lucknow and 3 Ors.

Sateesh Chandra Verma Vs State of U.P.and 2 Ors.

Bindra Prasad Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.