Allowed

Akbar Ali @ Pappu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2024/157/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Section 304 IPC for the alleged murder of the applicant's wife. Eye-witness son's statements and the post mortem doctor indicated accidental fall from a vehicle, not assault. Applicant had no criminal history and was in jail since 31.10.2023. Court allowed bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, and remaining present at trial.

Akbar Ali @ Pappu Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:6047

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 157 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Akbar Ali @ Pappu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil,Riyaz Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.375 of 2023, under Section 304 I.P.C., P.S. Khairghat, District Bahraich.

¶8

It is alleged in the F.I.R. that daughter of the informant was married with applicant ten years ago. Out of the wedlock, she has three children. It is further alleged that accused persons used to beat his daughter. A compromise was entered into between them looking into the interest and future of the children and she was sent to her in-laws place. They have committed murder of the daughter of the informant.

¶9

Learned counsel for applicant has drawn attention of the court towards the statement of the eye witness Dilshad who is son of the deceased recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as well as under Section 164 Cr.P.C. where he has not supported the prosecution case and has said that his mother was vomiting, she opened the gate and did not ask anyone to stop the vehicle and in this process, she fell down and due to this accident, she died.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant further invited attention of the court towards the ante mortem injuries received by the deceased in the post mortem and submits that this corroborates the statement of Dilshad. Dr. Atul Misha who conducted the post mortm in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has also supported the statement of Dilshad and has submitted that victim has received these injures not by any assault rather due to accident by falling from the running vehicle. Applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 31.10.2023.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer.

¶12

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 31.10.2023, statement of Dilshad, post mortem report as well as the statement of Dr. Atul Mishra under Section 161 Cr.P.C., applicant has no criminal history, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant Akbar Ali @ Pappu be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

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

¶21

Order Date :- 19.1.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Akbar Ali @ Pappu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akbar Ali @ Pappu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Vimlesh @ Raka Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko.

Rishab Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Radheraman Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Ramesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Karan Ojha Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Ramjeevan Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.