Allowed

Panu @ Vikram Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Apr 2023BAIL/14025/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a bail application filed by Panu @ Vikram Singh in a case involving affray and attempted murder. The grant was based on discrepancies in the informant's initial statement regarding the cause of injury and the non-vital nature of injuries sustained.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on a personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions of appearance and non-interference.

Panu @ Vikram Singh Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 88

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14025 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Panu @ Vikram Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhaskar Bhadra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Bhaskar Bhadra, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S.B. Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 531 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 307, 323, 504 IPC, Police Station Aonla, District Bareilly during pendency of the trial.

¶7

FIR of the present case was lodged against applicant and four others and according to the FIR applicant and his associates abused the informant and thereafter co-accused Gabbar @ Sanjay Singh opened fire and due to the fire opened by him, informant Vipin Kumar Singh sustained firearm injury on his left hand and it is further alleged in the FIR that in the incident Sonu also sustained injury.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that entire allegation made against the applicant is totally false and baseless and applicant did not participate in the incident and although in the FIR there is specific allegation against co-accused Gabbar @ Sanjay Singh that he caused firearm injury to the informant Vipin Kumar Singh on his left hand but when the statement of injured Vipin Kumar Singh was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. then he changed the version of the FIR and stated that applicant opened fire due to which he sustained injury. He further submitted that this fact clearly suggests that applicant has been falsely implicated by the informant in the present matter. He further submits that even from the perusal of the injury report of the informant Vipin Kumar Singh, it appears that he sustained lacerated wound on his left wrist, therefore, injury sustained by him was on his non vital part and injured Sonu sustained only abrasion. He next submits that although applicant is having criminal history of two cases but he has explained the criminal history in the affidavit and in the present matter applicant is in jail since 19.12.2022.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that in the FIR the role of causing firearm injury was assigned to co-accused Gabbar @ Sanjay Singh but in his statement informant/injured attributed the role of causing injury to applicant and informant sustained injury on his left wrist and another injured Sonu sustained only multiple abrasion.

¶10

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

¶11

Although in the FIR it is alleged that firearm injury on left hand of the informant was caused by co-accused Gabbar @ Sanjay Singh but when the statement of injured/informant was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. then he attributed the role of causing firearm injury to the applicant. Further, from the perusal of the rejection order, it appears that informant Vipin Kumar Singh sustained injury on his left wrist and injured Sonu sustained abrasion and from the X-ray no bony injury was found.

¶12

Therefore, from the discussion made above, in view of this Court, it is a fit case to release the applicant on bail.

¶13

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

¶14

Let the applicant - Panu @ Vikram Singh 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:-

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 12.4.2023

¶20

AK Pandey

¶21

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Panu @ Vikram Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Panu @ Vikram Singh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Aarif Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Pooja Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Dileep Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Khempal Vs State of U.P.

Arif Vs State of U.P.

Mobin Vs State of U.P.