Allowed

Vimal Yadav @ Villa v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 May 2022BAIL/21084/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra allowed Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 21084 of 2022. The court released the applicant, Vimal Yadav @ Villa, on bail in a murder case despite serious charges, noting he was not named in the FIR, lacked clinching evidence against him, and his case was distinct from the primary accused.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to seven conditions regarding attendance, tampering with evidence, and default proceedings.

Vimal Yadav @ Villa Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21084 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vimal Yadav @ Villa Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 33 of 2020, under Sections 302, 328, 392, 411, 34 IPC, Police Station Govind Nagar, District Mathura.

¶7

As per the FIR allegation the father of informant had gone to get milk for family at about 07.00 in the morning but did not return and his mobile also is reportedly switched off. While searching his father the informant reached his godown at Sector G1 behind Ramleela Maidan, where he found that his father was lying in suspicious condition on floor and is already dead. It is alleged that the deceased has been done to death. In the postmortem report cause of death remained uncertain and viscera was preserved for chemical analysis. Report of the chemical analysis has been received as per which viscera contains ethyl alcohol and organochloro insecticide.

¶8

Admittedly, the applicant was not named in the FIR and his name has surfaced subsequently after the CCTV footage was scanned and it was found that one Amit was seen having the mobile of deceased and had apparently administered poison to the deceased. The applicant was working in the same godown and he has also been arrested on account of his complicity in the offence.

¶9

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and no clinching material has yet been collected during the course of investigation to connect the applicant in the crime. It is also stated that recovery of certain amount and 81 tablets of sedative does not constitute sufficient basis to implicate the applicant in the crime. It is also urged that the case of applicant is separate and distinct from that of Amit from whom evidence of more clinching nature has surfaced in the CCTV footage. It is further argued that the applicant is in

¶10

jail since 08.02.2020 and the trial is not likely to conclude shortly and that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the conduct of trial.

¶11

Learned AGA opposes the bail application but facts as have been urged on behalf of the applicant are not seriously disputed.

¶12

Having considered the respective submissions advanced; perused the materials placed on record; considering the fact that applicant is not named in the FIR and no clinching material is recovered from the applicant; the applicant has no criminal history; his case is separate and distinct from accused Amit, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail, at this stage. Above observations made in the bail order shall, however, not be construed as expression of opinion, on the merits, at the stage of trial.

¶13

Let the applicant - Vimal Yadav @ Villa involved in aforesaid case crime 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, with the following conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(v) 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. is issued and the 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

¶19

law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the 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.

¶21

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.

¶22

Accordingly, the present bail application is allowed.

¶23

Order Date :- 25.5.2022 Ashok Kr.

¶24

Digitally signed by ASHOK KUMAR Date: 2022.05.26 15:10:04 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vimal Yadav @ Villa v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vimal Yadav @ Villa 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

Govind @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sumit Vs State of U.P. though Principal Secretary (Home) and 3 others

Rakesh Vs State of U.P.

Ramaasrya Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Lal and Another Vs State of U.P.

Vineet Alias Tinku Vs State of U.P.