Allowed

Omkar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Apr 2023BAIL/8378/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed. The High Court held that the applicant, Omkar, should be released on bail in the murder case involving an unlawful assembly. The court noted the applicant's general role, lack of criminal history, parity with co-accused, and lack of grounds to tamper with evidence.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Omkar was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding non-tampering and attendance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 53

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. SECOND BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8378 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Omkar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudarshan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sudarshan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused as the record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant states that this is second bail on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicantOmkar has been rejected on 25.05.2022 by the co-ordinate bench of this Court vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 47584 of 2021.

¶7

The instant second bail application for bail has been moved on behalf of the applicant, Omkar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 362 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 302, 323, 506, 149 I.P.C, Police Station C.B. Ganj, District Bareilly, during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the first information report is based on false and fabricated facts. The accused/applicant is innocent who has been falsely implicated in this case due to village party bandi. Learned counsel for the applicant states that though the accused- Omkar is named as accused no. 2 in the F.I.R, but similar, general and omnibus role has been assigned to all the accused persons, that they attacked the deceased with Lathi and stick head of cot (paya) and front part of hand-pipe. Learned counsel for the applicant concedes that no

¶9

specific role has been assigned to the applicant and there is no evidence that any fatal injury has been caused by the applicant, though he contends that the offence has been committed by the accused persons forming an unlawful assembly and in furtherance to achieve the object of such unlawful assembly, therefore, all the accused would be liable as each of the accused had committed the offence jointly and severely.

¶10

The co-accused- Ravinda @ Arvind and Popram, have already been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 40779 of 2022 and 41334 of 2022 on 10.04.2023 and 11.10.2022 respectively, which is annexed as Annexure No. 09 to this application supported with an affidavit. Therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.

¶11

The learned counsel for the applicants further contends that at present at the time of disposal of the bail application omnibus role or specific role of the accused is to be seen and since the bail application of co-accused persons who have been assigned similar role, have been enlarged on bail, therefore, on the basis of parity also this bail application is liable to be allowed.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that there is no criminal history of the applicant, no likelihood of tampering the evidence or absconding of the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that the accused/applicant is languishing in jail since 10.07.2020, who has no previous criminal history. His further submission is that in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will also fully cooperate with the trial court in getting the trial concluded expeditiously. He has also submitted that the applicant

¶13

will not intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case.

¶14

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but could not rebut the aforesaid facts and evidence.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view that in the aforesaid circumstances, it is a fit case in which the accused-applicant should be enlarged on bail.

¶16

Thus, having regard to overall facts and circumstances of this case and also keeping in view the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties, the nature of offence, evidence regarding the complicity of applicant and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, a case for bail is made out. The bail application is, thus, allowed.

¶17

Let the applicant, Omkar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶22

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall

¶23

not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence, in case the witnesses are present in court;

¶24

The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶25

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

¶26

It is made clear that the trial of the aforesaid case shall be conducted without being influenced by any observation made herein above which are confined to the disposal of the instant application for bail.

¶27

Order Date :- 13.04.2023. Vinod.

¶28

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

Omkar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Omkar 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

Ram Sewak Vs Banwari and Others

Brij Nath and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Mushtaq Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Rohitas Kumari and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Irfan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Roop Ram Vs Ram Sanehi and Another