Allowed

Anand v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Jan 2023BAIL/59332/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under Section 439 CrPC, the court examined petitions regarding false implication and evidence inconsistencies in a murder and attempt to murder case. Finding it a fit case considering the record, the court allowed bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Anand was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties under specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 59332 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Anand Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Lokesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and also perused the material placed on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed u/s 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 45 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 34 of IPC, Police Station Rohata, District Meerut, during the pendency of trial.

¶7

As per prosecution story, the applicant along with six other named accused persons and five unknown persons are stated to have assaulted the deceased person Guddu and injured person Sanjay son of Mangat Singh on 27.03.2022 at about 07:30 PM by firing at them.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegations levelled in the FIR are not supported by the postmortem report of the deceased person as all the injuries sustained by the deceased person are incised wound which cannot be assigned to the applicant and even the same have not been caused by any firearm weapon. Learned counsel has further stated that later on as an improvement, the informant has stated in his statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. that the applicant and other co-accused persons were armed with lathi and danda. Learned counsel has also stated that the incised wound even cannot be caused by hard and blunt object and this further falsifies the prosecution story.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that later on, the statement of the independent witness Satpal has been recorded on 03.05.2022 who has stated that the applicant and other co-accused persons were carrying a sharpedged weapon along with lathi and danda. The statement of said independent witness Satpal has been recorded on 03.05.2022 which is at a belated stage i.e. after one and a half month of the occurrence. Learned counsel has further stated that no statement of injured Sanjay Rana has been recorded by the Investigating Officer till the submission of final report (charge-sheet) and even there is no injury report of injured Sanjay Rana annexed to it. Learned counsel has also stated that the prosecution story stands falsifies on the ground of inconsistency with the postmortem report and the statement of the informant. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have

¶10

also been touched upon at length. The applicant is languishing in jail since 30.03.2022 having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant on the ground that the applicant is the main accused person in the FIR and the co-accused Devendra was arrested by police and in his statement, it has come up that the applicant was there at the time of offence and a sharp-edged weapon has been recovered at his instance.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the statement of coaccused person is not admissible in evidence and cannot be read against the applicant.He next submits that the co-accused Sanjay and Bhushan have already been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.01.2023 and 10.01.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.36361 and 48149 of 2022, copy of which orders have been produced before this Court and are taken on record. It is thus contended that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

On the other hand, learned AGA has also opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the fact that in the FIR itself, the injuries are stated to have been caused by firearm weapon and later on, it has come up in the statement of the witnesses that injuries have been caused by a sharp-edged weapon.However, could not dispute the fact that co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail.

¶14

Considering the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, going through the record and specially the postmortem report and the FIR, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case for bail.

¶15

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Anand involved in aforesaid crime 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 with the following conditions that :-

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Order Date :- 12.1.2023

¶22

S.Ali

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anand v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand 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

Rajendra Kumar Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.

Amir Vs State of U.P.

Imran Vs State of U.P.

Avnish Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Surajpal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shailendra Dwivedi @ Sheelu Vs State of U.P.