Allowed

Mithlesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko.

Allahabad HC6 May 2024/1889/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Section 302 IPC arising from a lathi attack during a field altercation causing head injuries and death. Court noted no premeditated intent in the FIR, long custody without criminal history and delayed trial, allowed bail on bonds and sureties with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Mithlesh to be released on bail in Case Crime No. 239 of 2020 on personal bond and two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each with conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:34871

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1889 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Mithlesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- D.K. Singh Somvanshi,Alok Kumar Singh,Sanjay Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1 . Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Harishankar Maurya, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶8

3 . In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that on 07.08.2020 at about 10 PM, the nephew of the informant and his son were working in the agriculture fields when the applicant, who was also taking care of the agricultural field entered into an altercation and, the applicant attacked the son of the informant with the use of Lathi, which resulted in the injuries on the head. The injury report on record includes multiple contusion injuries at the top of the head, which was also ascertained the cause of death as per the post mortem report. Initially the FIR was lodged under Section 308 IPC subsequently, it has been converted to an offence under Section 302 IPC. The applicant is in custody since 16.08.2022. The supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant indicating that only one witness has been examined so far, as such there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future.

¶9

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

¶10

5. Considering the fact that even in terms of the FIR, injuries were caused on account of an altercation without there being any mention of premeditated intent to cause

¶11

the offence in question coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail 16.08.2022 having no criminal history and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial and without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶12

6. Let the applicant Mithlesh be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 239 of 2020, under Sections 302, 308, 323 IPC, Police Station Neemgaon, District Lakhimpur Kheri, on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

(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.

¶16

Order Date :- 6.5.2024 Arun

¶17

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

Mithlesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithlesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. 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

Roopam Chaudhary and 3 Others vs Addl. District Judge Court No. 3 Unnao and Another

Deepak Rajbhar vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Manoj Kumar and Others vs Sub Divisional Officer, Tehsil Sadar, Pratapgarh and Another

Akram vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Shoeb vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Satish Saroj @ Kaka vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.