Allowed

Ramdular v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2023BAIL/5873/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted in case of culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 IPC). Court held applicant made out a case for bail given his age, medical issues (tuberculosis, diabetes), and post-mortem indicating deceased consumed alcohol, without expressing an opinion on merits. Allowed bond with sureties subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5873 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Ramdular Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajvendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 245 of 2022, under Sections 304 I.P.C., Police Station Khutahan, District Jaunpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the applicant, who happens to be the owner of the agricultural land, is stated to have put some electrical wires at the fence of his land, as such, the deceased person Vinod Kumar Singh, is stated to have been entangled in it and died due to electric shock on 18.9.2022 at about 5.30 pm.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. Learned counsel has next stated that there is nothing on record to indicate that the applicant has committed any offence, whatsoever. Learned counsel has further stated that the age of the applicant is 78 years and is suffering from tuberculosis and is a diabetic person. It is next submitted that the post-mortem report indicates that the deceased person had consumed alcohol which is categorically referred in Annexure-3 annexed to the affidavit accompanying the bail application. It is further submitted that even in the cause of death, the doctor has stated that viscera was preserved for suspected alcohol. It is also stated that HTL (High Tension Line) passed through the field and it was running at the time of the incident and the applicant was somehow electrocuted as he was under the influence of liquor.

¶10

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against

¶11

him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 13.1.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the fact of the presence of alcohol as indicated in the post-mortem report.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, at this stage, 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 .

¶14

Let the applicant- Ramdular involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶15

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

ii. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶17

iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶18

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

¶19

v. 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 or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

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

¶21

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶22

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the

¶23

applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶24

Order Date :- 7.2.2023 Shalini

¶25

Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramdular v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramdular 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shilendra Vs State of U.P.

Gandhi Pal Vs State of U.P.

Nathu Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.and Another

Satendra @ Tallu Vs State of U.P.

Janak Singh Vs State of U.P.

Prince Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others