Allowed

Raju v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2024/2607/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a second bail application, the Allahabad High Court granted bail to the accused in a murder case. The court considered prolonged detention and a high court report stating prosecution evidence was nearly complete as grounds for release.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail subject to personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 50,000 each and undertakings to appear in court and not tamper with evidence.

Raju Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:27742

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2607 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Raju Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Suyesh Pradhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

This is second application for bail, the first bail application of the applicant was rejected vide order dated 18.03.2021 with direction to conclude the trial expeditiously.

¶7

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

¶8

The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.255 of 2016 under section 302 IPC, P.S. Maholi, District Sitapur.

¶9

While arguing the second bail application, the counsel for the applicant argues that the applicant is in custody since 12.07.2016 and the eye witness has not supported the prosecution story.

¶10

In view of the prolonged detention, this court had called for a report from the trial court which is on record which states that twelve witnesses have been examined so far and the evidence with regard to prosecution is almost completed.

¶11

Considering the said report to the effect that the prosecution witnesses have already been examined and considering the prolonged pretrial detention undergone by the applicant since 12.07.2016 and finding the same to be prima-facie in violation of the right of speedy trial, the applicant who has no criminal history prior to the offence in question, he is entitled for the bail. Thus the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Raju be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) each of the like amount 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 :- 4.4.2024

¶17

VNP/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Raju v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju v. State of U.P. Thru. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Santosh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P., Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Rajkumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Harshit @ Sheru Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. of U.P., Lko.

Atul vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others

Rahul Rawat Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Taufeeq Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home