Allowed

Jitendra Pasi Alias Surendra v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC5 May 2023/1675/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a bail application filed by an accused charged with murder. Noting that co-accused had been granted bail and the informant failed to identify the applicant in his police statement, the Court enlarged the applicant on bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties in like amount subject to standard conditions of not tampering with evidence and appearing in court.

Jitendra Pasi Alias Surendra Vs State of U.P… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1675 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Jitendra Pasi Alias Surendra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Amitabh Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Amitabh Tripathi, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Hari Shankar Maurya, the learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking bail for the applicant in Case Crime no. 02 of 2022, under Sections 302, 323, 34 I.P.C., registered at Police Station G.R.P. Raebareli, District Raebareli.

¶7

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of F.I.R. lodged on 11.02.2023 by the informant Surendra Kumar Pasi against his brother Jitendra Kumar Pasi (the applicant) and one A.J. alias Ajay Sonkar alleging that there was a dispute regarding a house between the informant and his brother and they had gathered for entering into a settlement. As there was a dispute, police was called by making a phone call on No. 112 but the applicant Jitendra Kumar Pasi ran away. Thereafter, the informant and his wife were going towards their rented house, the accused persons started beating the informant and the applicant fired a shot which hit the informant's wife. The informant's wife was taken to a hospital where she was declared dead.

¶8

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent person, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history.

¶9

In the statement of the informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. he stated that one Deepak Sonkar was also involved with the named accused persons Jitendra Kumar Pasi and A.J. alias Ajay Sonkar in beating him.

¶10

The Trial Court has already recorded statements of the informant Jitendra Kumar Pasi as P.W. 1 and that of another witness Bittu Singh as P.W. 2. The informant has stated that

¶11

some unknown persons had beaten him and he did not name the applicant. P.W. 2 Bittu Singh has stated that he had called the ambulance which had taken the informant's wife to the hospital but he did not say anything adverse to the applicant.

¶12

It has been stated that the co-accused Deepak Sonkar and A.J. @ Ajay Sonkar have already been granted bail by means of orders dated 21.03.2023 and 25.04.2023 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 2748 of 2023 & 2257 of 2023 respectively.

¶13

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that although the applicant has been named in the FIR, he has not been named in the statement of the informant recorded before the trial court where the informant stated that the miscreants had covered their faces and he could not recognize them; that both the other co-accused persons Deepak Sonkar and A.J. @ Ajay Sonkar have already been granted bail, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case.

¶14

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant Jitendra Pasi @ Surendra be released on bail in Case Crime no. 02 of 2022, under Sections 302, 323, 34 I.P.C., registered at Police Station G.R.P. Raebareli, District Raebareli on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions: -

¶16

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶17

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶18

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 5.5.2023

¶21

Pradeep/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Jitendra Pasi Alias Surendra v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Pasi Alias Surendra v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Aleem Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secretariat Lko. and 3 Others

Vijay Kumar Alias Khushiram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Pradeep Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt., Lucknow

Ajay Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home. Lko

Ved Prakash Chaurasiya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko.