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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Enlargement on bail in FIR No.556 of 2021: the applicant Suresh Yadav to be released on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (a) undertaking to attend hearings, (b) not committing any similar offence, and (c) not inducing, threatening or promising any person acquainted with the facts so as to dissuade disclosure or tamper with evidence.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Suresh Yadav is entitled to be enlarged on bail in FIR No.556 of 2021 (Sections 328, 304, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Ayodhya) in his second bail application, the first having been rejected on 13.12.2022. +1 more

Court's answer

The applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail, considering that the trial is not proceeding despite this Court's directions, there is no specific allegation against him, he is in custody since 16.09.2022, and his criminal antecedents are duly explained in Para 26 of the rejoinder affidavit.

Ratio / Principle

On a perusal of the FIR, prima facie no allegation of administering poison or offering food was made against the applicant; the said acts were alleged against the other two co-accused.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail - FIR No.556 of 2021, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Ayodhya, under Sections 328, 304, 506 IPC. Second bail application; the first was rejected vide order dated 13.12.2022. The FIR alleged that money was due and payable by the applicant to the deceased, that cheques issued were dishonoured, and that the deceased, having gone to the applicant on 05.01.2021 and been offered food, came home and died; as informed by learned AGA, poison was found in the viscera. Held: on perusal of the FIR, prima facie no allegation of administering poison or offering food was made against the applicant, the same being alleged against the other two co-accused; the trial was not proceeding despite the order dated 27.05.2024 directing examination of five fact witnesses within six weeks, and none had been examined; the applicant was in custody since 16.09.2022; and his criminal antecedents were duly explained in Para 26 of the rejoinder affidavit. Bail allowed: release on personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each, with conditions as to attendance, non-commission of similar offences, and non-tampering with evidence/witnesses. (Pankaj Bhatia, J.; order dated 18.7.2024)

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:48366

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5005 of 2024

Applicant :- Suresh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kinkar Upadhyay,Jagendra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today in Court is taken on record.

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

3. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.556 of 2021, under Section 328, 304, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Ayodhya.

4. This is the second bail application of the present applicant. The first bail application was rejected vide order dated 13.12.2022.

5. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that certain amounts of money was due and payable by the applicant to the deceased and were not paid. It was stated that subsequently some cheques were issued which were dishonoured and the deceased went to the applicant on 05.01.2021 when he was offered some food and thereafter, he came home and died. In terms of the viscera analysis, as informed by learned AGA, poison was found in the viscera.

6. In the light of the said, learned counsel for the applicant argues that in the order dated 13.12.2022 itself the Court had directed that after the examination of the fact witnesses, a fresh bail can be filed. He further draws my attention to the order dated 27.05.2024 whereby directions were given by this Court for examining the five fact witnesses within six weeks. Learned counsel argues through the order-sheet placed on record in the rejoinder affidavit that none of the witnesses has been examined despite directions of this Court and the applicant continues to be in custody since 16.09.2022.

7. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

8. On perusal of the FIR, prima-facie, no allegations were levelled against the applicant of administering poison; in terms

of the FIR, no allegation of administering poison or offering food was made against the applicant and the same was done against the other two co-accused. As such, considering the fact that the trial is not proceeding despite directions and there is no specific allegation against the applicant coupled with the fact that the applicant is in custody since 16.09.2022 and his criminal antecedents is duly explained in Para 26 of the rejoinder affidavit, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant Suresh Yadav be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

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

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

(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.

Order Date :- 18.7.2024 nishant

Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench