Allowed

Kalicharan @ Kallu Sen v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Apr 2023BAIL/13224/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 302 IPC where the informant and fact witnesses turned hostile during trial, the court allowed the applicant's release on bail furnished with a personal bond and two sureties, without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to specific conditions.

Kalicharan @ Kallu Sen Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13224 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Kalicharan @ Kallu Sen Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Chandra Prakash Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S.B.Maurya, learned AGA-I, for the State.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.19 of 2022,under Section302 IPC, Police Station Kharela, District Mahoba during pendency of the trial.

¶7

FIR of the present case was lodged by the daughter of applicant and according to the FIR, applicant informed her that he has committed the murder of her mother, i.e., his wife and when daughter of applicant, i.e., informant arrived at her paternal home along with her husband and other relatives then she found that her mother was lying in a injured condition and thereafter when she was taken to her to the Hospital then in the way she died.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although there is allegation against the applicant that applicant committed murder of his wife and after committing the murder, he informed her daughter and thereafter the daughter lodged FIR against him but actually he neither committed the murder of his wife nor he ever informed his daughter and under suspicion his daughter lodged FIR of the present case.

¶9

He further submits that during trial the daughter of applicant and other witnesses of facts have been examined and they did not support the prosecution case and clearly stated that applicant did

¶10

not inform her that he committed murder of his wife.

¶11

He further submits that as all the witnesses of fact including the informant have turned hostile, therefore, there is no evidence against the applicant on record. He further submits that applicant, who is in jail since 16.3.2022, i.e., for the last about more a year may be released on bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is specific allegation against the applicant that he informed his daughter that he committed murder of his wife and thereafter FIR was lodged but he could not dispute the fact that the informant and other witnesses of fact have appeared before the court concerned and were examined by the trial court and then they did not support the prosecution case and they have turned hostile.

¶13

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

¶14

From the record it reflects that there is allegation against the applicant that he committed murder of his wife and after committing the murder of his wife, he informed his daughter and thereafter his daughter lodged FIR but it appears that during trial, his daughter,i.e., the informant of the case and other witnesses of fact turned hostile and they did not support the prosecution case. 10. Applicant is not having any previous criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 16.3.2022, i.e., for the last about more than a year.

¶15

Therefore, from the discussions made 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- Kalicharan @ Kallu Sen be released on

¶18

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:-

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

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

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶23

Order Date :- 26.4.2023 SKM

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kalicharan @ Kallu Sen v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalicharan @ Kallu Sen 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

Pushpendra @ Kallu Vs State of U.P.

Rajrani Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Lavkush Pasi Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Kumar (Lekhpal) Vs State of U.P.

Jagendra @ Jogendra Vs State of U.P.