Allowed

Shiv Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 May 2022BAIL/21145/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application under Section 302 IPC. The applicant alleged false implication due to delayed FIR and a sham recovery of ornaments. Finding no criminal history and unsatisfied prosecution on merits, bail was granted subject to stringent conditions regarding court attendance and bond.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amounts subject to specific undertakings regarding court attendance and non-usage of bail.

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

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21145 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ray Sahab Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This is an application for bail moved on behalf of the applicant, Shiv Kumar, who is involved in Case Crime No. 212 of 2021 under Section 302 of I.P.C., Police Station- Ramghat, DistrictBulandshahar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is further contended that the occurrence is alleged to have taken place on 22.08.2021, whereas, FIR was lodged on 25.08.2021 after a great delay of 4 days and no explanation of the same has been given by the prosecution. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant is not named in the FIR. It is further contended that the case of the first informant Vijay Kumar at the time of lodging the First Information Report was that Poonam Devi, Kedari Singh and Dilip were responsible for the killing of his sister and that they had stolen the jewelry which she was wearing. Subsequently, one Virendra the uncle of Kedari Singh gave an application before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bulandshahar that infact it was not Kedari, Poonam and Dilip who had killed the deceased but it was her own brother Vijay Kumar who had killed his sister. Thereafter, on the basis of a statement of one Mukhbir the applicant Shiv Kumar, brother of the deceased was implicated. The implication was further strengthened by a recovery memo

¶8

which was prepared by the Police on 8.9.2021. This recovery was made on the pointing of the applicant. At the time of the recovery from the house of the applicant one silver Chain, two Pajeb of Silver, two Khadua of Silver, one Kamarband of Silver and one Hasali which was coated with gold and one ornament to wear on the nose were found. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed the statement of the jeweler from where virtually these very ornaments were got released by the mother of the applicant on 31.08.2021 and thus the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that these very ornaments which were kept in the house of the applicant which was also the house (Mayka) of the deceased were recovered by the Police. Learned counsel for the applicant, therefore, submits that it was a sham recovery. Learned counsel for the applicant states that there was no criminal history of the applicant and he is in jail since 08.09.2021 and if he is released on bail, there is no chance of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail or tampering with the prosecution witnesses. It is further contended that the charge sheet has been submitted in the case and, therefore, vis-a-vis the applicant no further investigation is required.

¶9

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not deny the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. He also did not deny that the charge sheet had been submitted.

¶10

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival claims, the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶11

The bail application is, accordingly, allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant, Shiv Kumar, be released on bail in Case

¶13

Crime No. 212 of 2021 under Section 302 of I.P.C., Police Station- Ramghat, District- Bulandshahar on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) 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 the court.

¶15

In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as an abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶16

(ii) 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 Panel Code.

¶17

(iii) 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 on such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Panel Code.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case (ii) framing of charges and (iii) recording of statement under Section 323 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

¶19

court to treat such default as an abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

Order Date :- 25.5.2022 vkj

¶21

Digitally signed by VIJAY KRISHNA JAISWAL Date: 2022.05.25 18:40:54 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shiv Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumar 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

Shiv Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Vs State of U.P.

Himanshu Vs State of U.P.

Dharmpal Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Vs State of U.P.

Chooramani @ Loree @ Lolee Vs State of U.P.