Allowed

Munish Kumar Mishra v. the State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home

Allahabad HC11 Apr 2023/3445/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant in a murder case where the deceased had not identified the accused. The court noted discrepancies in the recovery report regarding the flammable liquid, leading to satisfaction for bail.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering with evidence and attending court.

Munish Kumar Mishra Vs the State of U.P… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 16 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3445 of 2023

¶2

Applicant :- Munish Kumar Mishra Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Abhishek Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jayant Singh Tomar, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the records.

¶5

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 907 of 2022, under Sections 302, 307, 326 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki.

¶6

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 30.0.2022 stating that the informant's brother Sheshnath was working as Guard in an office and living there with his wife and children. On the fateful day i.e. 30.08.2022 at about 4.00 hrs. the informant's nephew informed him that at about 2.00 hrs. in the night, while Sheshnath was doing his guard's duty and and his wife and children were sleeping some one came from behind, poured diesel on Sheshnath and set him ablaze and thereafter he did the same with his wife Shivdevi. When they raised hue and cry, their children woke up tried to put off the fire and called some neighbors.

¶7

Statement of both the injured persons were recorded before their death and none of them stated that they could have identify the person who had poured diesel on them and set them ablaze. The deceased Sheshnath had stated that the applicant is nephew of his wife Shivdevi and there were some disputes between the deceased and the applicant.

¶8

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has disclosed his involvement in another Case Crime No.0525 of 2018, under Section 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. Police Station Haidergarh, District Barabanki, in which he has been granted bail.

¶9

The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith the copies of statements recorded during investigation. Although some independent witnesses have been examined by the Investigating Officer, all of them have stated that there is old dispute between the applicant and the deceased persons and they have implicated the applicant on the basis of suspicion. It has further been stated in the counter affidavit that in his custodial statement the applicant has confessed that he had caused the incident and a plastic cane of five liter capacity was recovered on his pointing out and it is alleged that he had brought diesel in the cane and had thrown the same on the deceased persons and had set them ablaze. However, the copies of statements of the witnesses of the alleged recovery namely Sub Inspector Abhimanyu Mall, Sub Inspector Shushil Kumar Tripathi, Constable Krishnanand Chaurasia, Constable Sunil Kumar have been annexed with the affidavit filed in support of bail application, all of whom have stated that the cane recovered contained kerosene.

¶10

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶11

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the applicant is the nephew of the deceased Shivdevi; that the dying declaration of both the deceased persons has been recorded and none of them have stated that the person who had caused the incident was

¶12

identified by them; that the applicant has been implicated on the basis of suspicion on the ground of previous disputes between the applicant and the deceased persons; that the police claims that the applicant confessed having caused the incident and an empty cane was recovered on his pointing out, whereas four witnesses of the alleged recovery, all of whom are police personnel, have stated that the cane contained kerosene and the applicant is languishing in jail since 04.09.2022 and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am satisfied that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case crime.

¶13

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant-Munish Kumar Mishra be released on bail in Case Crime No. 907 of 2022, under Sections 302, 307, 326 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶15

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

¶16

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶17

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

¶18

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 11.4.2023 Ram.

¶20

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

Munish Kumar Mishra v. the State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munish Kumar Mishra v. the State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home

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

Narendra Kumar Verma Alias Raj Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

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

Golu Alias Raunak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Abdul Salam Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home, Civil Secretariat, District Lucknow and 3 Ors.

Jhabbu Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Abhimanyu Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home and 3 Others