Allowed

Shiv Kumar Pal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Apr 2023BAIL/51018/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad granted bail to the applicant charged with murder and culpable interment under sections 302 and 201 IPC. The court noted lack of eyewitness account, reliance on undated recovery memo, and the nature of prosecution evidence.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of attending trials, not tampering with evidence, and avoiding criminal activities.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51018 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Saurabh Tripathi

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and Shri Saurabh Tripathi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first informant.

¶6

By means of this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 761 of 2021, under Sections 302 and 201 IPC, police station Handia, district Prayagraj, seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.

¶7

As per prosecution case, in brief, on 25.12.2021, a first information report was lodged by the uncle of Namrata Yadav (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') against unknown person alleging inter alia that dead body of his niece was found lying on 25.12.2021 at about 8.30 AM towards the south of orchard. Injuries were also found on the neck of the deceased. It appears that she has been murdered by some unknown person by sharp-edged weapon.

¶8

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the FIR. It is the case of the prosecution that on the same day 15 items were recovered from the pocket of jeans of the deceased. In the post mortem report dated 25.12.2021, three injuries were found. When statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the informant was recorded, he disclosed the complicity of the applicant stating inter alia that the applicant was having affairs with the deceased because his house is situated in front of the house of his sister and the deceased on two occasions had gone to the house of his sister.

¶9

It is next submitted that on 27.12.2021 police

¶10

apprehended the applicant from his house and thereafter forcibly taken his ATM cards, cheque book and photograph and thereafter in order to falsely implicate the applicant shown that the aforesaid items were recovered from the place of incident and recovery memo was also prepared in this regard. Much emphasis has been give by pointing out that the second recovery memo has been fabricated by the police as no date on recovery memo has been mentioned. Not only this, but the the police has also shown false recovery of knife at the pointing out of the applicant. Lastly, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is no chance of the applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.12.2021 and in case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that statement of the informant and recovery of knife suggest that the applicant was involved in the murder of the deceased.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that there is neither any eyewitness of the incident nor any direct evidence against the applicant. The complicity of the applicant came into light in the statement of the informant on the basis of suspicion on account of the fact that the applicant as well as the deceased were in touch with each other. Undated recovery memo of the recovered items, which according to the learned counsel for the applicant, was prepared later on after arrest of the applicant, also creates doubt upon the prosecution case.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby

¶14

allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant Shiv Kumar Pal, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶16

(i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.

¶17

(ii) 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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

(iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity.

¶19

(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

¶21

It is clarified that anything observed in this order is limited to the extent of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence to be adduced uninfluenced by anything mentioned in the order.

¶22

Order Date :- 27.4.2023 Ishrat

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ISHRAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shiv Kumar Pal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumar Pal 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

Ramanand @ Nanhkooram @ Natepal Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Vs State of U.P.

Raj Kumar @ Raju Vs State of U.P.

Sonu @ Sameer Vs State of U.P.

Shadab Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pradeep Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others