Allowed

Ram Nivas v. State of U.P and 3 Others

Allahabad HC8 Aug 2022BAIL/20404/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application for an applicant accused of having failed to report a missing child, where the body was found in his house. The court ruled that family members cannot be implicated merely on suspicion without specific overt acts.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions against tampering and influence.

Ram Nivas Vs State of U.P and 3 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20404 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Nivas Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Ram (Rawat),Giri Ram Rawat,Indra Deo Mishra

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramesh Chandra Yadav

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

1.Heard Sri Indra Deo Mishra, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jitendra Kumar Jaiswal, the learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri R.C. Yadav, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

¶7

2.The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 49 of 2022 under Sections 201, 203 and 16/17 of Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 I.P.C. read with 377 I.P.C., P.S. Rani Ki Sarai, District Azamgarh.

¶8

3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 11-02-2022 regarding the informant's son having gone missing while he was playing outside the house.

¶9

4.As per the prosecution case, the dead body of the child was recovered from a plastic bag kept on a loft in the house of the applicant on the pointing out of his son Manish, who is a coaccused in the case. During investigation the statement of a child aged about 9 years was recorded, who stated that he was playing with the deceased child when the co-accused Manish took him away by giving him an allurement of a toffy.

¶10

5.After investigation the police submitted a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. wherein it is stated that the co-accused Manish had killed the kidnapped child Kunal for ransom and he had hidden the dead body in his house. The dead body was recovered in a plastic bag kept on a loft in the house of the applicant on the pointing out of the co-accused Manish, who happens to be the applicant's son. Regarding the applicant it has been stated that even after having knowledge of commission of crime by the co-accused he did not give its information to the police.

¶11

6.The learned counsel for the informant has submitted that even as per the prosecution allegations, the sole allegation against the applicant is that he did not give the information of the incident to the police. There is no allegation against the applicant of having committed any act which may amounts to an offence.

¶12

7.It has been averred in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant is an innocent person, he has been falsely implicated in the case, he is having no previous criminal history and he is in jail since 14-02-2022. It has also been stated in the affidavit that there is no possibility of the applicant tampering with any evidence and in such circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. It is also stated in the affidavit that the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will fully cooperate in the investigation.

¶13

8.Per contra, the learned counsel for the informant and the learned A.G.A., on the basis of instructions have opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. The learned counsel for the informant has submitted that since the dead body of the kidnapped child was recovered from the house of the applicant, his complicity in the crime cannot be ruled out.

¶14

9.Refuting the aforesaid submission, the learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that for an offence committed by any person, his family members cannot be implicated merely on the basis of suspicion.

¶15

Keeping in view the fact that the child witness who is said to have been playing with the deceased child Kunal when he was kidnapped, has implicated the co-accused Manish; that the dead body is said to have been recovered on the pointing out of the Manish; that the dead body was kept in a plastic bag along with an old cotton kept on a loft in a room and also keeping in view that there is no specific allegation or any overt act having been committed by the applicant, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for being enlarged on bail pending conclusion of the trial. The bail application is accordingly allowed.

¶16

11.Let the applicant - Ram Nivas be released on bail in Case Crime No. 49 of 2022 under Sections 201, 203 and 16/17 of Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 I.P.C. read with 377 I.P.C., P.S. Rani Ki Sarai, District Azamgarh on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶17

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

¶18

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 8.8.2022

¶23

pks

¶24

Digitally signed by PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.08.08 17:55:17 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Nivas v. State of U.P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Nivas v. State of U.P and 3 Others

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

Ram Newaj Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Marks Savar Vs State of U.P.

Sheebu @ Akram Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Bharti Vs State of U.P.

Shahzaman @ Naiyar Vs State of U.P.