Allowed

Rajat Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Dec 2022BAIL/38737/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application filed under Section 302 IPC, the court allowed the applicant to be released on bail pending trial. The applicant argued false implication and lack of evidence, while the State opposed. The court found the applicant made out a case and granted bail subject to specific conditions regarding presence and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38737 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rajat Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sufia Saba,Sayeed Saif Ullah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Avinash Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Ms. Sufia Saba and Mrs. Lubna Singh, learned counsels for the applicant, Sri Avnish Pandey, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant Rajat Kumar with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 223 of 2022, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station-Sarsawa, District-Saharanpur during pendency of trial.

¶7

As per the FIR lodged on 28.05.2022 at 20:35 hours against unknown persons by maternal uncle of the deceased that on 27.05.2022 at about 07:00 p.m. in the evening, his nephew Anuj had gone to purchase medicine. When he did not return, the informant as well as his family members tried to search for him. On 28.5.2022 at about 07:00 a.m., the informant was informed that a dead body is lying near a plot in Jamuna Colony. The informant recognized the said dead body to be of his nephew Anuj, therefore, the present FIR was lodged.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The name of the applicant surfaced for the first time in the statement of Ajay i.e. brother of the deceased which was recorded after 16 days of the incident wherein he has stated that the deceased was seen for the first time with the applicant in the evening of 27.05.2022 as was informed to him by few persons. He has further stated that the applicant was inimical with the deceased as the deceased was friendly with his sister. Emphasizing upon the inquest report, learned counsel for the applicant submits that inquest was conducted on 28.05.2022 where Ajay was present but he did not disclose about the aforesaid fact on that date. There is no direct or circumstantial evidence to show involvement of the applicant in the murder of the deceased Anuj. There is no last seen evidence against the applicant. All the independent witnesses who are not eye witnesses of the incident have only disclosed about the relation

¶9

between the deceased and the sister of the applicant due to which, under suspicion, his name has been implicated in the present case. It is next argued that the applicant has no criminal history. The said fact is mentioned in para 18 of the application. There is no possibility of his fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 15.06.2022. Accordingly, he requests for bail.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail by contending that innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Considering the nature of the offence, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, 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 involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

(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 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.

¶14

(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 Penal Code.

¶15

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

¶16

(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 charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section

¶17

313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant are 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.

¶18

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶19

Order Date :- 7.12.2022 Madhurima

¶20

Digitally signed by MADHURIMA GARG Date: 2022.12.08 10:36:36 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajat Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajat 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

Sajid Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Suman Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Sunita Devi Vs State of U.P.

Chandrapal Vs State of U.P.

Bhuri Singh @ Bhura Vs State of U.P.

Khajan Singh Vs State of U.P.