Allowed

Manjesh and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Feb 2023BAIL/6842/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Court No. 83 allowed a bail application filed by two accused persons facing charges under various sections of the IPC for an altercation resulting in death. The applicant argued the FIR was delayed and the facts involved a free fight. The court, noting no criminal history despite opposing submissions from the State, granted bail with personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed to be released on personal bond and two sureties each with conditions to not tamper evidence, cooperate in trial, and not commit further crimes.

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

¶1

Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6842 of 2023 Applicant :- Manjesh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shambhawi Shukla,Rajrshi Gupta,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶3

Heard Rajrshi Gupta, learned counsel for the applicants as well as Shri Vibhav Anand Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶4

Applicants seek bail in Case Crime No. 104 of 2022, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 504, 506, 308, 304 I.P.C., Police Station- Saurikh, District- Kannauj, during the pendency of trial.

¶5

As per the prosecution story, the applicants and two other named accused persons, Saraswati and Mohan Lal are said to have entered into an altercation with respect to their drain water on 21.03.2022 at about 08:00 AM whereby they are stated to have inflicted injuries to the family members of the informant causing injuries to four members in all. One person, namely, Ram Shankar is said to have succumbed to injuries later on.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the FIR is delayed by about two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Learned counsel has further stated that there is a cross version to the present FIR and the FIR was lodged from the side of the applicants nominating the complainant party as accused. As the free fight had taken place between both the parties and in the said altercation, three persons had sustained injuries on the side of the applicants including applicant no. 1 Manjesh. Learned counsel has also stated that at this point of time, it cannot be ascertained as to which party was the aggressor. The applicants, Manjesh and Updesh are languishing in jail since 01.05.2022 and 04.06.2022, respectively and they are having no criminal history to their credit. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial.

¶7

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicants but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants and also the fact that the applicants have no criminal history.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence, evidence on record, stage of trial and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for releasing the applicants on bail.

¶9

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the bail application is allowed . Let the applicants Manjesh & Updesh involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶10

(i) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶11

(ii) The applicants shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶12

(iii) The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 27.2.2023

¶17

Mohini

¶18

Digitally signed by :- MOHINI RAI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Manjesh and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjesh and Another 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

Layak Singh Vs State of U.P.

Amit @ Pavva Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Amar Pal Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Pal Vs State of U.P.

Mukul Pathak Vs State of U.P.