Allowed

Pankaj Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Allahabad HC16 Jan 2024/3591/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held that the applicant is a fit case for being released on bail in a murder charge despite confessional evidence and recovery of a weapon, considering the hostile statement of the prosecution witness and incarceration duration.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to standard conditions, including prohibition of tampering and requirement to appear.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:4325

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3591 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Pankaj Rawat Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Riyaz Ahmad,Hemant Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shubham,Siddharth Tripathi

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Second supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

This is the second bail application of the appliant. The first bail application of the applicant bearing Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.8841 of 2021 was rejected by Co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 24.08.2022.

¶9

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.24 of 2021, under Sections 302, 34 I.P.C., P.S. Banthra, District Lucknow.

¶10

It is alleged in the F.I.R. that brother of the informant went on the fortune shop of Sanjay on 28.01.2021. There Pankaj Rawat, Golu, Aman, Akash and their two friends were present. They took the deceased with them somewhere. The brother of the informant had some monetary dispute with applicant Pankaj. Today in the morning on 29.01.2021 informant found his brother in an injured stage who was shot at about 07:00 am. He was taken to the civil hospital where he was declared dead.

¶11

Learned counsel for applicant submits that independent witnesses namely, Laxmi Narain, Hanuman, Shyam Bihari, Sanjay Kumar Gautam have not supported the prosecution case however, subsequently, while recording the statement of Shani under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the applicant was charge-sheeted. He next submits that during trial Shani has been declared hostile as he has not supported the prosecution case right from examination in chief as P.W.2.

¶12

It is further submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no evidence against the

¶13

applicant except his confessional statement, there is no eye witness of the recovery. Applicant has explained the criminal history in para 35 of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 02.03.2021.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer and has submitted that confessional statement is supported by the recovery of 315 bore country made pistol from the applicant.

¶15

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 02.03.2021, he has explained the criminal history in para 35 and P.W.2 has turned hostile, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶16

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant Pankaj Rawat 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:

¶18

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶19

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(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.

¶22

(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.

¶23

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section

¶24

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.

¶25

Order Date :- 16.1.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶26

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

Pankaj Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, 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

Krishna Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Hari Ram @ Hari Lal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Umesh Alias Sajan Panda Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Shaukin Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Chandra Shekhar Rawat @ Goley Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Abhishek Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.