Allowed

Pranshu @ Navrangi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Allahabad HC5 Sept 2024/7412/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to the applicant in a murder charge case. The court observed that the informant failed to support the prosecution story during the trial, despite initial allegations of injuries caused after the applicant drank.

What did the court decide?

Applicant enlarged on bail in FIR/Case No. 086 of 2024 under Section 304 IPC on personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 20,000 each.

Pranshu @ Navrangi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:61412

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7412 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Pranshu @ Navrangi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Pratyush Rawat,Rajan Mishra,Soumya Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1 . Supplementary afÏdavit filed today on behalf of 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 . In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the applicant after drinking had caused the injuries after a fight, based upon which the applicant is being prosecuted for the offence under Section 304 IPC. Subsequently, the informant has not supported the prosecution story in terms of the statement recorded recorded during trial and filed along with the supplementary afÏdavit filed today.

¶9

4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer.

¶10

5. Considering the said statement, the applicant who in custody since 12.03.2024 is enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶11

6. Let the applicant Pranshu @ Navrangi be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 086 of 2024, under Section 304 IPC, Police Station Lonikatra, District Barabanki, 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:

¶12

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to

¶13

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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

Order Date :- 5.9.2024 Arun

¶17

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

Pranshu @ Navrangi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pranshu @ Navrangi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rajesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Ishrail Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Vijay Srivastava @ Pawan Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Sahajaram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Home Lko. and Another

Suhel Khan @ Baba vs the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Smt. Shobha Yadav vs Additional Principla Judge Family Court IInd Unnao and another