Om Kumar @ Gyasi v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
This court rejected the third bail application of Om Kumar @ Gyasi arrested under Sections 302 and 307 IPC for firing at a police constable. The court held that no case for bail was made out given the gravity of the offense.
What did the court decide?
Prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail was rejected.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:107009
Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10239 of 2023
Applicant :- Om Kumar @ Gyasi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ayank Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
Heard Sri Vishal Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ayank Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present third bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant in Case Crime No. 1479 of 2015 under Sections 302 and 307 of IPC, Police Station Loni, District Ghaziabad with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail. The first and second bail applications of the applicant were dismissed in default vide orders dated 16.02.2022 and 19.01.2023.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. No motive has been assigned to the applicant to make fire on the police personnel. It is also submitted that no source of light is mentioned in the site plan while it is alleged that at the time of incident sufficient light was available at the place of occurrence. The Chowki in-charge Subhash Atri is not the eye witness since he arrived at the place of occurrence after the incident. It is also submitted that there are material contradiction inter alia in the statement of witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. There is no public witness of the incident while it is alleged that after the incident number of people gathered over there. It is also submitted that during course of trial statement of PW-1-complainant, PW-2 Subhash Atri has been recorded and there are material contradictions in their statement which cannot be believed. It is also submitted that charge sheet has been filed against the applicant only and two other persons were not even traced out by the Investigating Officer during investigation. Criminal history of the applicant is explained in para 2 of the supplementary affidavit. It is submitted that alleged recovery of 9 mm pistol and two cartridges is planted since there is no public witness of such
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to enlargement on bail in a case involving accused murder and attempt to murder of police personnel.
Whether material contradiction in witness statements and innocent implication of the applicant make out a case for bail.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Om Kumar @ Gyasi
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Mayank Kumar Jain
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · May
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/10239/2023
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court