Allowed

Vikram v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2023BAIL/48385/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a second bail application filed by an appellant accused of murder and dowry death. The court relied on overcrowding and constitutional rights to direct the trial court to conclude the trial within one year, granting bail subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions to cooperate in the trial, not seek adjournments, and remain present for opening, framing of charge, and recording of statement

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:227240

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48385 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Vikram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishal Jaiswal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the informant.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Vikram, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 234 of 2021, under Sections 498A,302,202 IPC Police Station Chaubeypur, District- Kanpur Nagar, during pendency of trial.

¶9

This is the second bail application. The first bail application was rejected by the coordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 29.9.2022, which is not available. There is allegation against the applicant of causing murder of his wife on account of unfulfilled demand of dowry.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the statement of P.W.3, Suryansh, who is son of the applicant and deceased, recorded before the trial court, he has stated that he saw that deceased(mother) loading gun .He called his father who asked her why she is loading gun.Thereafter quarrel started between them and on account of snatching of gun, the same got fired and hit the deceased.It is a case of false implication. The applicant is in jail since 30.11.2021 and has no criminal history.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶11

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of

¶12

Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 ; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed

¶13

Let the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶14

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶15

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶16

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶17

That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any 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 to any police officer;

¶18

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶19

The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶21

The trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a period one year.

¶22

The registrar(Compliance)of this court is directed to communicate this order to the trial court for compliance within ten days.

¶23

Order Date :- 1.12.2023

¶24

Atul kr. sri.

¶25

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vikram v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikram 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Maharani Devi Vs State of U.P.

Ritesh Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Akash Thakur Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anil Prajapati Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jishan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others