The High Court granted bail to Anil Kumar in a murder case. The court dismissed poison allegations as unsupported by forensic timing and observed that no evidence directly implicate the applicant.
The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding appearance and conduct.
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:235201
Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48786 of 2023
Applicant :- Anil Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Tripathi,Mandvi Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.
He further submits that the wife of the deceased namely, Smt. Ritu also did not name the applicant nor assigned any specific role in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of this Court to the statements of independent witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. who have categorically stated that the deceased was taking liquor since morning and due to over drinking he became unconscious and his condition became deteriorated, on account of which he died. He further submits that neither there is any direct nor indirect evidence against the applicant to demonstrate the complicity of the applicant in the commission of alleged offence except the fact that the applicant organised the programme. It is thus contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 21.11.2022, having no criminal history.
stated that at the time of incident, some video was also recorded in the mobile of the deceased with respect to programme, wherein it has been seen that one person was having two glass of liquor in his hand and another glass was being handed over by the applicant to the deceased and he is sure that some poisonous substance has been administered in his drink, due to which he died. Learned counsel further argued that in the post mortem report viscera was preserved for histopathology and bio-chemical analysis and viscera report shows that Ethyl Alcohol and Organa Chloro Insecticides poison was found. It is thus contended that the deceased was administered poison in the drink due to which, the deceased died. Thus, the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Insecticides is an agricultural poison normally used in suicide and the death would take place in case of consumption of fatal dose for more than 12 hours whereas, in case of consumption of Ethyl Alcohol also, the death may take place in more than 12 hours in case of fatal dose, thus if the deceased was administered poisonous substance in the drink on 10.02.2021 between 11:00 P.M. to 11:30 P.M. then the deceased would have died in the morning of next day i.e. 11.02.2021. Learned counsel has also drawn the attention of this Court to the post mortem report dated 11.02.2021 conducted at about 02:45 P.M. wherein the time since death has been shown as 2/3rd of a day. Thus, it appears that the deceased died at about 11:00 to 11:30 P.M. of 10.02.2021, and therefore, the statements given by the independent witnesses that the deceased was taking liquor since morning and due to over-dose of the liquor, his condition became deteriorated and he died has material bearing. Learned counsel further argued that even if the prosecution story is taken to be true, for the sake of argument, that the deceased was administered poison, then that poison had been given to him in the morning, which matches with the State Medico Legal Cell report that in case of consumption/administering such poison, death would take place after a lapse of 12 hours and if that poison was given to the deceased in the morning then it is not known as to who was the person who administered poison, thus the arguments advanced by learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant has no force, ergo the applicant is entitled for bail.
merits of the case, this Court is of the view, that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when 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.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial
court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
Order Date :- 12.12.2023
S.Ali
Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to release on bail while addressing allegations of poisoning.
Whether the quantum of analysis in the investigation report prevents the grant of bail.
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Anil Kumar
State of U.P.
Gautam Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
