Allowed

Angad Maurya v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Nov 2022BAIL/48165/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed bail to the applicant accused of an attempt to cause death under Section 307 IPC. The court relied on contradictions in prosecution evidence, simple injury nature, and the applicant's clean criminal record to grant relief subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Angad Maurya to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence or witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 92

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48165 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Angad Maurya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.

¶5

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

¶6

As per prosecution story, applicant along with another coaccused person had opened fire upon the informant due to enmity of land dispute, when he was returning back to his home from 'Diwani Kutchery' on 04.07.2022.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The unexplained delay of 21 hours in lodgement of F.I.R. shows that the same has been lodged as an afterthought. False recovery of one country made pistol has been shown from the possession of the applicant as there is no any independent eye-witness to the said recovery. There are material contradictions in the statement of the injured as well as in the version of the FIR, which shows that injured had not seen who had opened fire upon him. Medical evidence also does not support the prosecution version. Applicant is no way involved in committing the aforesaid offence. Apart from this case, applicant does not have criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 16.07.2022. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

¶9

In this matter, it appears that there are material contradictions in the statement of the injured as well as in the version of the FIR; injuries received by the injured are simple in nature and are not on the vital part of the body; injured was admitted in the hospital i.e. B.R.D. Medical College, Gorakhpur for treatment on 05.07.2022 but on the next date i.e. 06.07.2022, he was discharged from the said hospital; applicant does not have any criminal history coupled with the fact that applicant is

¶10

languishing in jail since 16.07.2022; grounds for bail is sufficient.

¶11

Hence, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, 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, Angad Maurya , who is involved in Case Crime No.187 of 2022, under Section 307 I.P.C, Police StationGola, District- Gorakhpur, 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶13

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶15

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶18

Order Date :- 1.11.2022 Ashutosh

¶19

Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH SINGH Date: 2022.11.01 16:49:48 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Angad Maurya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Angad Maurya 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shubham Varnwal Vs State of U.P.

Aslam Vs State of U.P.

Manvendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Asgar Ali Vs State of U.P.

Sanjeet Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Akmal and Another Vs State of U.P.