Allowed

Uttam Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC14 Aug 2024/4327/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal miscellaneous bail application was filed by the applicant charged with culpable homicide and defamation. The court observed recovery of the weapon on a report by the applicant. Applying parity principle despite threat injuries, the High Court released the applicant on bail subject to specific conditions regarding witness protection

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 20,000/- each.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:56096

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4327 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Uttam Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Naveen Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Harsh Vardhan Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Harsh Vardhan Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

In terms of the F.I.R. registered on 27.12.2023 under Section 307 read with Section506 I.P.C., it was alleged that on 27.12.2023, when the father of the informant was sleeping at the shop at about 1.00 on account of old enmity, Uttam Singh son of Uma Shanker Singh (applicant), caused the injuries with the use of iron rod on the head which resulted his father becoming unconscious. It was also stated that on earlier occasions with regard to repair of Tyre, a dispute has occurred in between them when the applicant had issued threats. It was also stated by the informant that the informant was at home and could see in the light of a bulb and identified the applicant. Subsequently, in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the informant stated that on the day in question i.e. 27.12.2023, father of the informant was sleeping at the shop when the applicant had caused injuries on the head which ultimately resulted in his death. It was stated that the informant had seen two persons causing injuries with the use of lathi danda on his head. It was also stated that when the father fell down, the two persons ran away and later on it was revealed to the informant that the said two persons were the applicant and the co accused Ranjit Kumar. The

¶8

informant also stated that as she was nervous as such she indicated in the F.I.R. that the accused caused injuries with the use of iron rod while the injuries have been caused with the use of lathi danda.

¶9

Subsequently, the statement of the witness Rajesh Jaiswal was also recorded wherein he stated that he has seen the two persons including the applicant running with the wooden sticks. It was also stated that around one month's ago, a dispute had occurred with regard to repair of the Tyre in between the applicant and the deceased. A similar statement was given by another witness Rahul.

¶10

In the light of the said, learned counsel for the applicant argued that the co accused Ranjit Kumar Dubey was enlarged on bail vide order dated 2.45.2024 passed by this Court

¶11

Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have strongly opposed the prayer for bail by arguing that the name of the applicant was specifically taken. Even the recovery of danda was done at the instance and pointing out of the applicant. It is further submitted that the co accused who was enlarged on bail was issuing threats to the informant and the informant was apprehended of loss of life and liberty at the instance of the co accused and as such considering the gravity of the offence, the bail application should be rejected.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the trial has not yet started and even the charges have not yet been framed and the applicant is in custody since 28.12.2023 having criminal history of one case which has been duly explained in paragraph 27 of the bail application. Hence, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶13

What transpires from the record is that in terms

¶14

of the statement of the informant recorded after lodging of the F.I.R. and in terms of the two statements, common role of causing injuries on the head of the deceased by the use of lath danda was assigned to both the accused. The recovery was effected only at the instance and pointing out of the applicant.

¶15

Considering the allegations made against both the accused including the applicant to be similar, a case for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity is made out. The applicant who has no pending case against him and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that if the applicant is released on bail, can either be at a flight risk or can 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.

¶16

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶17

Let the applicant Uttam Mishra be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.538 of 2023, under Sections 302, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Wazirganj, District Gonda 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:-

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

Keeping in view the threat perception as shown by the informant, it is provided that applicant shall appear before the concerned Station House OfÏcer of the Police Station Wazirganj, District Gonda on the first day of every month and in case any complaint is made by the informant of apprehension, the police authorities shall be at liberty to take appropriate steps in this regard.

¶22

In case the applicant in any way tries to winover the witnesses or threaten them, the informant would be at liberty to move the bail cancellation application before the trial court, as may be advised.

¶23

Order Date :- 14.8.2024

¶24

Shukla

¶25

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

Uttam Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uttam Mishra 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Lekhraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Masuk Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin.Secy.Deptt. of Home

Ram Naresh Sahu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Amit Pal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Suraj Pal Alias Putti Lal Pal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Sayeed Ahamd vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.