Allowed

Gunakar Urf Shri Krishna v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Aug 2023BAIL/15684/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed in a murder case under Section 302 IPC where the applicant was the brother of the deceased and the only evidence against him was suspicion. The court found him entitled to bail due to lack of cogent evidence and prolonged detention of over three and a half years.

What did the court decide?

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

Gunakar Urf Shri Krishna Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:170099

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15684 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Gunakar Urf Shri Krishna Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Gupta,Ankit Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ankit Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 525 of 2019, under Sections 302 IPC, Police Station Rasulabad, District Kanpur Dehat during pendency of the trial.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged against applicant and two others and from perusal of the FIR it appears that on the basis of suspicion applicant has been made accused along with other accused persons.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that except suspicion there is no evidence against the applicant on record and applicant is brother of the deceased. He further submits that applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 03.10.2019 i.e. for more than three and half years.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

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

¶12

It is a case of circumstantial evidence and it appears that except suspicion there is no other cogent evidence against the applicant on record and applicant in the present matter is in jail since 03.10.2019 i.e. for more than three and half years.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

Let the applicant - Gunakar @ Shri Krishna 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:-

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 23.8.2023 AK Pandey

¶22

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

Gunakar Urf Shri Krishna v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gunakar Urf Shri Krishna 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

Jugraj Singh Vs State of U.P.

Dharamveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mustkim Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sanju Vs State of U.P.

Yadvendra Alias Mona Vs State of U.P.

Satyendra Kumar Chaubey @ Sabloo Vs State of U.P.