Allowed

Ram Tiwari v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

Allahabad HC4 Jan 2024/12710/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application in a murder case. The applicant, Ram Tiwari, was accused of murdering the complainant's brother based on last seen evidence and a confessional statement, but lacked independent corroboration. The court found it a fit case for bail as the applicant had no criminal history. Bail was granted on personal sureties with specific conditions regarding witness tamperin

What did the court decide?

Ram Tiwari was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions prohibiting tampering with witnesses and ensuring court attendance.

Ram Tiwari Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:1011

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12710 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Ram Tiwari

¶5

Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home, Lko.

¶6

Counsel for Applicant :- Upendra Prakash Pathak,Sharad Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶7

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶8

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶9

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per allegation in the first information report, the complainant's younger brother Nitish Kumar (deceased) was seen on 15.6.2021 with his friend Ram Tiwari, present applicant at village temple till 3.00p.m. and thereafter he was present at home till 6.00p.m.. He then went out somewhere. He was seen till 7.00p.m. by one villager Saroj Awasthi along with the applicant near big idol of Hanuman Ji. When the brother of the complainant did not return back till late night, he tried to search and found his body on 17.6.2021 in the sugarcane field of Suresh Awasthi. The complainant has suspected involvement of the applicant in the murder of his brother.

¶10

It is submitted that in the post mortem report, two contusions on the head have been found. Cause of death is comma due to ante mortem head injury. No one has seen the incident. The last seen evidence has been given by one Ambuj Kumar and on that basis and on the basis of the confessional statement of the applicant, the applicant has been implicated. There is no evidence at all. False recovery of danda has been shown from the open place on the pointing out of the applicant, to which there is no independent witness. The applicant is in jail since 27.6.2021.

¶11

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

3. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which he is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

5. Let the applicant Ram Tiwari, involved in Case Crime No.182/2021 under section 302 I.P.C., P.S. Rampur Kala, district Sitapur 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶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 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.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial

¶21

court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

6. The application is allowed accordingly.

¶23

Order Date :- 4.1.2024 kkb/

¶24

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Tiwari v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Tiwari v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. 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

Similar cases

Parmendra Bajpai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Lko.

Angad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Surenrda Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. U.P. Lko.

Sonu Kumar Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Kuldeep Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Ishityaqk @ Manne Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.