Allowed

Pranav Tewari v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Allahabad HC2 Feb 2024/1186/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application, the Allahabad High Court allowed the release of the applicant, who faced charges of murder (Section 304 IPC) in a rash and negligent driving case. The court observed that the allegations prima facie established a case under Section 304A IPC only and granted bail on a personal bond with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail in FIR No.725 of 2023 on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each.

Pranav Tewari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:9758

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1186 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Pranav Tewari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶7

2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.725 of 2023, under Section 304 IPC, P.S. PGI, District Lucknow.

¶8

3. The FIR in question was lodged alleging that an unknown vehicle which was being driven very rashly and negligently hit the scooty on which the wife of the informant was taking her two children from school to home, as a result whereof, the two children died in the said accident. In the light of the said, the submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that even as per the FIR as well as the post-mortem report, a case for accident would be made out against the applicant, which is punishable under Section 304A IPC. He argues that there is no allegation that there was any intent to cause the accident at the instance of the applicant. It is further argued that vehicle of the applicant was identified subsequently, and he was linked with the offence in question.

¶9

4. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶10

5. Considering the fact that the allegations in the FIR pertain to causing an accident on account of rash and negligent driving, prima-facie , a case would be made out under Section 304A IPC, more so, when the accident took place on a busy road at Shahid Path.

¶11

6. Considering the said statement, on the basis of the allegation, the averments so as to link the applicant and try him under Section 304 IPC are prima-facie missing, as such, the applicant, who has no criminal history and is in custody since 04.11.2023, is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶12

7. Let the applicant Pranav Tewari be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with

¶13

two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶15

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶16

(c) 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.

¶17

Order Date :- 2.2.2024

¶18

nishant

¶19

Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Pranav Tewari v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pranav Tewari v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sandeep Kumar Awasthi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

Billa @ Raja Ram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Shivam Pathak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Baba @ Jagmohan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. and Others

Suraj Pratap Rai Alias Suraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko.

Guddu @ Suresh Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others