The Single Bench maintained commitment in an anticipatory bail application (resembling) filed by Shankar, involved in a murder case (Sections 302/34 IPC). The Court held there were no grounds to grant bail.
Bail application rejected.
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.
Court No. - 86
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37887 of 2022
Applicant :- Shankar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.
Heard Mr. Abhay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Shrawan Kumar Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The first bail application bearing No. 23240 of 2021 filed through e-mode, was rejected on merits by Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J, vide order dated 14.07.2021.
This is a second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant. This matter was released vide order dated 22.09.2022. As per Administrative Orders of Hon'ble The Chief Justice dated 20.10.2021, the office has listed the matter before this Bench today.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 159 of 2020 (S.T. No. 2758 of 2021), under Sections 302/34, 506 IPC, Police Station Harduaganj, District Aligarh, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that during trial three prosecution witnesses have been examined before the trial court, PW-1 Deepak Chaudhary, who happens to be the informant of the case, PW-2 Kuldeep is the eye-witness and PW-3 Vishnu is eye-witness, have not supported the prosecution version, therefore, there is no evidence against the applicant at this stage. It is next contended that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence.The applicant is languishing in jail since 29.07.2020. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that it is a double murder case. During investigation, the statement of Girish Chand, who succumbed to his injuries during treatment, was recorded by the Investigating Officer, in which he has assigned the specific role of firing to the applicant Shankar and submitted that the evidentiary value of the statement of Girish Chand under section 161 Cr.P.C. is yet to be examined by the trial court as per law, therefore, at this stage it cannot be said that there is no evidence against the applicant. It is also submitted that on the pointing out of the applicant, country made pistol has been recovered, which was used in the commission of crime. It is next submitted that the applicant has a criminal history of seven cases, which has not been explained by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced on behalf of parties, gravity of the offence and severity of the punishment, I do not find any good ground to grant bail to the applicant.
Accordingly, the second bail application is rejected.
Order Date :- 13.1.2023 Sazia
Digitally signed by :- SAZIA AQUIL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant charged with murder and culpable homicide.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shankar
State of U.P.
Mayank Kumar Jain
Sazia Aquil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
