Allowed

Deepu @ Jitendra Kumar Vishwakarma v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko.

Allahabad HC2 Jan 2024/15200/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single bench bail application in a trial court case involving abduction and criminal conspiracy. The accused argued false implication and cited bail for a similarly placed co-accused. Held: Bail allowed subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to satisfaction of the concerned court subject to specified conditions.

Deepu @ Jitendra Kumar Vishwakarma Vs State… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:80

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15200 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Deepu @ Jitendra Kumar Vishwakarma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Learned AGA informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including upto date case diary. Charge sheet in this case has been submitted against the applicant as well as co-accused persons, namely, Sonu @ Sanjay Saroj and Abhishek Kumar Vishwakarma @ Bauwa.

¶7

Heard Shri Vivek Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the accused/applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Deepu @ Jitendra Kumar Vishwakarma for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 0281 of 2023, under Sections 364, 120-B IPC, Police Station Kunda, District Pratapgarh, during trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. As per the FIR lodged by the father of the victim it is alleged that his son aged about 11 years was returning to his home after delivering the lunch box and he was abducted by some unknown persons in a vehicle, however, on being informed the police has laid traps and it appears that apprehended by the same, the miscreant had left his son at Heeraganj Road near Bhabhanpur from where his son had made a phone call and was recovered. During the course of investigation, the vehicle which was allegedly used in commission of the offence was traced and name of co-accused Sonu @ Sanjay Saroj has surfaced who had taken the vehicle from his relative, which was allegedly used by the accused persons in the commission of the offence.

¶10

It is further submitted that story as cooked up by the informant could not be believed in absence of independent

¶11

witness and the motive which has been attributed is very weak and the same was only available to the co-accused Sonu @ Sanjay Saroj.

¶12

It is vehemently submitted that it could not be believed by any stretch of imagination that as per the prosecution story when the Sonu @ Sanjay Saroj was in dire need of money why he would not accompany the others accused persons and no evidence has been placed on record which may suggest that the informant had received any payment with regard to the land acquired by the State and therefore all the allegations which have been levelled against the applicant and other co-accused persons are in the realm of hypothesis.

¶13

It is further submitted that identically placed co-accused person, namely, Abhishek Kumar Vishwakarma @ Bauwa has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 29.11.2023 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 14017 of 2023. The applicant is in jail in this case since 17.8.2023. Charge sheet has already been submitted and the criminal history of two cases pertaining to minor penal offences has been explained in paragraph 30 of bail application as well as in para 2 of the supplementary affidavit of date 18.12.2023 and there is no apprehension that the accusedapplicant after release on bail, may flee from the process of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶14

Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer for bail of the applicant on the ground that he is accused of committing heinous offence, however, he could not dispute that identically placed co-accused person, namely, Abhishek Kumar Vishwakarma @ Bauwa has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court and nothing has been brought in the knowledge of this Court, whereby the bail granted to coaccused has been challenged at any higher forum and has been cancelled by this Court.

¶15

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and also keeping in view the fact that identically placed co-accused i.e. Abhishek Kumar Vishwakarma @ Bauwa has been granted bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court and criminal history of two cases pertaining to minor offences have been explained and without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case on the basis of principle of parity, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant- Deepu @ Jitendra Kumar Vishwakarma involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

Observations made herein-above are only for the purpose of disposal of bail application and the same shall not have any bearing on the trial of the case.

¶23

Order Date :- 2.1.2024 Muk

¶24

Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Deepu @ Jitendra Kumar Vishwakarma v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepu @ Jitendra Kumar Vishwakarma v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko.

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

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and 3 Others

Praveen Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Vishal Yadav @ Dharam Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Gulnaz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Basheer Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Manish Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.