Rakesh Kumar Keshari v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Single judge rejected bail in a murder case where the applicant was charged with the victim's throttling death, noting he was alleged to be actively involved despite lack of physical evidence against his possession.
What did the court decide?
Prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in murder case was rejected.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:116145
Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23510 of 2023
Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Keshari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mithilesh Kumar Gupta,Anju Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant in Case Crime No.62 of 2023, under Sections 302, 201, 34, 427 of IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Ghazipur with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. Initially, the F.I.R. was lodged against unknown person under Section 379, 304-A and 427 I.P.C. It is further submitted that name of the applicant has been disclosed by coaccused Ashutosh Dubey @ Aashu in his confessional statement. Co-accused Ashutosh Dubey @ Aashu assigned the role of catching hold to the applicant and one other co-accused Prince Singh @ Laddu. As per the post-mortem report, the cause of death was Asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem throttling. It is further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession or on the pointing out of the applicant. It is further submitted that there is no evidence against the applicant except the confessional statement of co-accused. It is further submitted that criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para-31 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It is further submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 14.02.2023 and that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving murder accused jointly with others.
Whether the confidential co-accused statement and lack of recovery affect the bail decision.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Rakesh Kumar Keshari
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Mayank Kumar Jain
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · May
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/23510/2023
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court