Allowed

Vishnu Kumar Dwivedi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Deptt. Lko.

Allahabad HC19 Apr 2024/2751/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Criminal Misc. Bail Application was allowed. The court held that the applicant was entitled to bail despite adverse evidence like confessional statements and witness intuition, noting that releasing him would not adversely affect the trial without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on bail by furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000 each.

Vishnu Kumar Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:30749

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2751 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vishnu Kumar Dwivedi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Kumar Singh,Abhisar Dev,Apoorv Dev Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1 . Rejoinder afÏdavit filed today by the counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

3 . It is argued by the counsel for the applicant that in the same case, one of the co-accused namely Anuj Gupta Alias Suraj Alias Suraj Gupta was enlarged on bail vide order dated 04.04.2024 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3643 of 2024, although the counsel for the applicant does not claim exact parity with the said co-accused. He further argues that there was no direct evidence to link the applicant with the offence in question except based upon the last link theory, which is also not corroborated. He further argued that the applicant has been linked with the offence in question based upon the confessional statement and the recovery, which is also not in accordance with law. He further argued that the applicant is in jail since 13.08.2023 and having one criminal history, which has been duly explained in the rejoinder afÏdavit, which is not a major offence, as such, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶9

4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer by arguing that the evidence of independent witness, who had stated to the effect that two days ago, a

¶10

fight had taken place in between the deceased and the applicant and thus she was of the opinion that the offence in question must have been caused by the applicant. My attention is also drawn to the confessional statement and the recovery of Rs.2 Lacs allegedly belonging to the deceased as admitted by the victim as well as the recovery of bed sheet allegedly used in the commissioning of the offence at the instance and pointing out of the applicant.

¶11

5. Considering the submissions made at the Bar, prima facie, while granting the bail to the coaccused, this Court had noticed that the body was recovered at 6 PM on 10.08.2023 whereas in the confessional statement of the applicant, he had stated that on 10.08.2023 on the date of his birthday, the act was committed in the night. He thus argues that the confessional statement, which has no evidentiary value is prima facie self contradictory.

¶12

6 . Considering the statement of the independent witness, which is based upon the intuition coupled with the confessional statement, which has no evidentiary value and considering the fact that 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 .

¶13

7. Let the applicant Vishnu Kumar Dwivedi be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 507 of 2023, under Sections 302/201 IPC, Police Station P.G.I., District Lucknow, 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:

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

Order Date :- 19.4.2024 Arun

¶18

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

Vishnu Kumar Dwivedi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishnu Kumar Dwivedi v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Sagar Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.

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

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

Sarik vs State of U.P.Thru. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Kirtivardhan Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Lucknow and Others

Arshad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin Secy. Home Lucknow