Allowed

Ramesh Alias Raju v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Jun 2023BAIL/10957/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Sameer Jain, J. allowed bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10957 of 2023 against Section 396 IPC charges involving double murder. The court granted bail despite the applicant's criminal history and the serious nature of the offence, noting the absence of other evidence besides confessional statements.

What did the court decide?

The applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Ramesh Alias Raju Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:128614

¶2

Court No. - 79

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10957 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Ramesh Alias Raju Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Abhishek Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri S.S. Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 64 of 2018, under Sections 396, 120B, 201 IPC, Police Station Kayamganj, District Farrukhabad, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged on 26.1.2018 under sections 396 IPC against unknown persons and according to the FIR, some unknown persons after committing murder of two persons committed dacoity.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown persons and during investigation, name of the applicant was revealed through the statement of co-accused persons and thereafter applicant was arrested on 3.2.2018 and it is alleged that he also confessed his guilt and except the confessional statement of the applicant and other accused persons there is no other evidence against the applicant.

¶10

He further submitted that applicant till his arrest was not having any criminal history but after his arrest he has been implicated in as many as 15 other cases. He has explained the criminal history of the applicant in para-4 to the supplementary affidavit.

¶11

He further submitted that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 3.2.2018 i.e. for last about more than five years and till date, trial of the case could not be concluded and only charges could be framed and therefore, considering the evidences collected by the Investigating Officer against the applicant and long incarceration of the applicant in the present matter, he may be released on bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that it is a case of section 396 IPC in which two persons lost their lives and after committing their murders, their valuables were looted but he could not dispute the fact that except the confessional statement of the applicant and other co-accused persons, there is no evidence against the applicant on record and applicant is in jail since 3.2.2018 i.e. for last more than five years. However, he further pointed out that applicant is having criminal history of 15 other cases apart from the present case.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶14

Although applicant is having criminal history of 15 other cases and it is a case of double murder in which after murder of two persons their jewelleries and valuables were looted but in the present matter except the confessional statement of the applicant and other co-accused persons, there is no evidence against the applicant on record and applicant is in jail since 3.2.2018 i.e for last more than five years.

¶15

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant- Ramesh Alias Raju , be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶18

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶19

(ii) 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 or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this

¶22

Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶23

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶24

Order Date :- 26.6.2023

¶25

Ankita

¶26

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramesh Alias Raju v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Alias Raju 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunita Vs State of U.P.

Shyamu Vs State of U.P.

Vipin Singh Vs State of U.P.

Shivam @ Golu Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Smt. Leela Devi Vs State of U.P.

Murtuza Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others