Allowed

Shyamu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Dec 2022BAIL/54618/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav granted bail to the applicant charged with murder under IPC 302 and related sections, imposing strict conditions to prevent adjournments and ensure court attendance, despite the severity of the charge.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions including prohibition of adjournments and mandatory attendance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 54618 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shyamu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mandvi Tripathi,Sunita Jain Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Supplementary affidavit explaining the criminal history of the applicant is filed today and is taken on record.

¶7

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 529 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 392, 411, 302 IPC, P.S. Handia, District Prayagraj.

¶8

As per allegations accused applicant along with co accused persons are said to have caused murder of father of the informant on 18.8.2022.

¶9

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that there is no specific allegations levelled against the applicant or any other co accused persons. It is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no eye witness of the incident. It is further submitted that no weapon has been assigned to commit the murder and nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. It is further submitted that perusal of the two injuries shown in the post mortem report, it is clear that both the injuries are not sufficient to cause death of any person hence it cannot be said that the deceased has lost his life due to both injuries shown in the post mortem report. Applicant is in jail since 21.08.2022 and has no criminal history.

¶10

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail. He submits that the investigation is now complete and the charge sheet has been filed.

¶11

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶12

Let the applicant- Shyamu, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open

¶14

for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶15

(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 IPC.

¶16

(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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 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 Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

¶19

In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Order Date :- 16.12.2022/RavindraKSingh

¶22

Digitally signed by RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.12.16 16:36:50 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shyamu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyamu 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

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohd Rafey Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Kailashnath Yadav Vs State Of Up Through its Principal Secretary Home

Krishna Kant Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Pal Baba Vs State of U.P.