Allowed

Deepak v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Aug 2023BAIL/31090/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge High Court granted bail to Deepak in a murder-related case (Section 364A IPC) after noting the absence of reasonable apprehension regarding evidence tampering or witness intimidation, despite the case involving a family dispute.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of appearance, no tampering with evidence, and no pressurizing witnesses.

Deepak Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:165390

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31090 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Deepak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vaibhav Tripathi,Anand Pati Tiwari,Saksham Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

In compliance with the order of this Court dated 09.08.2023, Sri Pankaj Mishra, Station House Officer, Sadar Kotwali, District Auraiya, the Investigating Officer concerned, is present in the Court along with the case diary.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Vikas Sahai, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party and perused the record.

¶8

The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 416 of 2023, under Section 364A I.P.C., Police Station Auraiya, District Auraiya during the pendency of the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant and the victim are relatives and owing to certain other disputes between the parties the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 21.04.2023 at 07.23 hours and the first information report was lodged on 21.04.2023 at 19.09 hours. The delay in the facts of the present case is fatal to the prosecution case. The victim was recovered on the same day. There is no independent witness to the recovery memo. It is further contended that the applicant was forcibly taken from his house and has been implicated in the instant case. The victim has not sustained any injury nor there was demand of any ransom by the applicant. The alleged recovery of a country made pistol and two live cartridges is false and planted. Prior to the instant case the applicant does not have any criminal history, however, after his arrest he has been implicated in other cases also. The applicant is in jail since 22.04.2023 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Having regard to the submissions made above and the fact that the applicant has remained confined for almost four months and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant- Deepak, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

¶13

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶14

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

¶15

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶17

Order Date :- 17.8.2023 SKT/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deepak v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak 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

Mohit Tyagi Vs State of U.P.

Ikram Vs State of U.P.

Savri Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Kanaujiya Vs State of U.P.

Arshad Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.