Allowed

Digvijay Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2023BAIL/21617/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant in a double murder case without expressing an opinion on the merits of the charges, noting he was held similarly positioned to co-accused already released on bail.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount.

Digvijay Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:131305

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21617 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Digvijay Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Kumar Vishwakarma,Dilendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Praveen Kumar Pandey

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri M.R. Khan Advocate holding brief of Sri Umesh Kumar vishwakarma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Parvesh Singh Advocate holding brief of Sri Praveen Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and Dr. S.B. Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State-respondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 245 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 302, 307, 336, 34 IPC, Police Station- Barhaj, District- Deoria, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and 13 others and according to the FIR, on 25.11.2021, applicant along with other accused persons arrived at the house of the informant armed with deadly weapons and thereafter, co-accused Baijnath and Lalji caused fire-arm injury to Ramesh Yadav and Kokilnand and both died at spot and in the incident several other persons sustained injuries.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on the basis of general and omnibus allegation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter along with 13 others and in the FIR as well as in the statement of the eye-witness, role of causing fire-arm injury to both the deceased has been assigned to co-accused Baijnath and Lalji.

¶10

He further submitted that similarly placed four accused persons Ranjeet Yedav, Ragini, Hansnath Yadav and Ajay Yadav have already been released by different co-ordinate Bench of this Court. He placed the bail orders of these four accused persons during the course of argument, which are taken on record and collectively

¶11

marked as 'A'. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 02.12.2021 i.e. for last about more than one and half years.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that it is a double murder case, in which number of persons also sustained injuries but both the counsels could not dispute the fact that role of causing fire-arm injury to the deceased persons has been assigned to co-accused Baijnath and Lalji and four accused persons have already been released on bail and case of applicant is at with them.

¶13

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

¶14

Although, present matter appears to be a case of double murder and in the incident number of other persons also sustained injuries but specific role of causing fire-arm injury to deceased has been assigned to co-accused Baijnath and Lalji and co-accused Ranjeet Yedav, Ragini, Hansnath Yadav and Ajay Yadav have already been released on bail and case of applicant is at par with them.

¶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- Digvijay Yadav 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

¶22

prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this 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 :- 4.7.2023

¶25

KK Patel

¶26

Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Digvijay Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Digvijay Yadav 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

Asgar Vs State of U.P.

Joginder Alias Andahwa Vs State of U.P.

Arjun Vs State of U.P.

Radhey Shyam Vs State of U.P.

Suraj @ Ballu Vs State of U.P.

Meetesh @ Neetesh Vs State of U.P. and Another