Allowed

Rajesh Verma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Nov 2022BAIL/18589/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed the bail application of the applicant charged under Sections 307, 323, and 504 IPC. The court held that unexplained delay in FIR lodgement, early discharge of the injured party, and clean criminal record established sufficient grounds for bail, citing Satendra Kumar Antil.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail requiring personal bond and two sureties, subject to compliance with conditions against tampering and appearing in court.

Rajesh Verma Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 92

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18589 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Rajesh Verma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijai Kumar Tripathi,Sanjay Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.

¶5

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

¶6

As per version of the FIR, on 16.09.2020, four accused persons including the present applicant had beaten the informant's son regarding sitting the ' Thela ' at 08:30 p.m., as a result, he received injuries.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The unexplained delay of seven days in lodgement of F.I.R. shows that the same has been lodged as an afterthought. He further submits that firstly injured attacked to the applicant during the drinking and step-down on the 'Thela' , as a result, he received injuries. He further submits that injured was admitted on 16.09.2020 in the B.R.D. Medical College, Gorakhpur for treatment but one day after i.e. 18.09.2020, he was discharged from the said hospital. Apart from this case, applicant does not have any criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 24.09.2020. There is no possibility of the applicant 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.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

¶9

In this matter, it appears that there is unexplained delay of seven days in the lodgment of FIR; injured was admitted on 16.09.2020 in the hospital but one day after he was discharged from the said hospital; apart from this case, applicant does not have any criminal history coupled with the fact that applicant is languishing in jail since 24.09.2020; grounds for bail is sufficient.

¶10

Hence, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping

¶11

in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant, Rajesh Verma , who is involved in Case Crime No.364 of 2020, under Sections 307, 323, 504 I.P.C, Police Station-Kotwali Padrauna, District-Kushinagar, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶13

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶15

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶18

Order Date :- 4.11.2022 Ashutosh

¶19

Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH SINGH Date: 2022.11.09 17:23:48 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajesh Verma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Verma 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamal Saini Vs State of U.P.

Faheem Vs State of U.P.

Chanchal Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Vineeta Vs State of U.P.

Sangram Singh Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Vs State of U.P.