Allowed

Chandrapal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Dec 2022BAIL/38981/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal bail application, the Allahabad High Court allowed bail for an applicant charged with murder and related offences. Relying on the exemption of co-accused and the lack of serious antecedents, the Court released the applicant on a personal bond with two local sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding attendance and conduct during trial.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38981 of 2022 Applicant :- Chandrapal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Karunesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶3

The case is taken up in revised call.

¶4

Heard Mr. Amit Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Karunesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.

¶5

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant Chandrapal with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 141 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 506, 120-B IPC, Police Station Iglas, District Aligarh during pendency of trial.

¶6

As per version of the FIR lodged by Amit Kumar on 04.04.2022 at about 06:17 hours, on account of property dispute, on 04.04.2022 at 2.00 AM in the night, three named accused including applicant have committed murder of father of informant by firing bullet at him. It has been further alleged that grand mother of the informant was sleeping near the deceased at the time of the incident.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. After investigation the other two named accused have been exonerated. From the statement of alleged eye witness, mother of the deceased the role of causing fire arm injury has been attributed to Banti and Mukesh which resulted the death of the deceased. He further submits that co-accused Raj Kumar @ Banti has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 22.11.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41992 of 2022, the case of applicant stands on better footing than that of the co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail. He further submits that there is no criminal antecedents of serious offences. 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 05.04.2022, accordingly, he requests for bail.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail by contending that applicant has criminal history of two cases one is of Electricity Act and the other is of the year 1999.

¶9

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.

¶10

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:-

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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 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.

¶15

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 7.12.2022/Arti

¶17

Digitally signed by ARTI SHARMA Date: 2022.12.15 14:44:12 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chandrapal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrapal 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

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.

Bhuri Singh @ Bhura Vs State of U.P.

Rajat Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Khajan Singh Vs State of U.P.