Allowed

Neeraj Alias Neera v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2022BAIL/45914/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to an accused in a murder case. The court held that with no clinching evidence, the reliance on circumstantial evidence and alleged recovery did not justify continued detention. Bail was granted subject to personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Relief: Release on bail subject to personal bond and two sureties, cooperating in trial, and not tampering with witnesses.

Neeraj Alias Neera Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45914 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Neeraj Alias Neera Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Mayank Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 220 of 2022, under Section 304 IPC, Police Station Khair, District Aligarh, during pendency of trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR and in fact, FIR has been lodged by brother of the deceased on 25.04.2022 alleging therein on 24.04.2022 at 6:00 PM, his brother (deceased) had gone for watering his field, however, he did not return back in the night. In the morning at 5:30 AM, one Satish came and informed that his brother is lying in the field in an injured condition. On the basis of the said information, first informant reached at the place of incident and found that his brother has been assaulted on his head by some unknown person. He had taken him to Varun Trauma Centre for treatement, from where, he was referred to Delhi, where he has succumbed to his injuries.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that during the course of investigation, no statement of the victim has been recorded. Even during the course of investigation, first informant, in his first statement, has categorically stated that some unknown person had assaulted his brother on his head causing his death, however subsequently, after about six days of the recording of first statement, his second statement has been recorded, in which, he, for the first time, has stated that on 23.04.2022, his brother had some altercation with

¶10

Neeraj (applicant) and in the backdrop of the said circumstance, he suspects that the applicant had killed his brother, however, except suspicion, there is no clinching evidence to connect the applicant with the present case and only on the basis of suspicion, the applicant has been made an accused.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that on the pointing out of the applicant, the police had subsequently shown to have recovered a blood stained Banka , which in fact has been falsely planted just with an intention to connect the applicant with the present case.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that present case is based on circumstantial evidence and except alleged recovery, there is no evidence to connect the applicant with the present case. Even first informant, neither in the FIR nor in his first statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC, has stated that on 23.04.2022, the applicant had some altercation with his brother, consequent to which, he has been done to death.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant is in jail since 04.05.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the trial by all means. There is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses, as such, he may be released on bail.

¶14

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the fact that the first informant has stated that on 23.04.2022, his brother had some altercation with Neeraj (applicant) and in the backdrop of the said circumstance, he suspects that the applicant had killed his brother, however, except suspicion, there is no clinching evidence to connect the applicant with the present case and only on the basis of suspicion, the applicant has been made an accused. The applicant is in jail since 04.05.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶15

Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that present case is based on circumstantial evidence and except suspicion, there is no clinching and cogent evidence to connect the applicant with the present case and only on the basis of alleged recovery of Banka , the

¶16

applicant cannot be treated to be an accused to be kept in jail for indefinite period. The applicant is in jail since 04.05.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit. There is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses,

¶17

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Let the applicant Neeraj Alias Neera be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶18

The applicant shall continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶19

The applicant shall not tamper with the witnesses.

¶20

The applicant shall not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶21

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶23

The bail application is accordingly allowed.

¶24

Order Date :- 19.11.2022 Nadim

¶25

Digitally signed by NADIM ALAM Date: 2022.11.22 12:02:24 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Neeraj Alias Neera v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neeraj Alias Neera 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

Amjad Vs State of U.P.

Babloo Vs State of U.P.

Ishwari Dayal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lucky @ Lucky Shakya Vs State of U.P.

Ekhlak Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Kumar Sharma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another