Allowed

Vimal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Apr 2024/780/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge allowed bail to applicant Vimal, charged with murder (IPC 302) in a domestic dispute. The court noted pre-trial detention of over 2 years, lack of criminal antecedents, only one witness examined, and no risk to trial proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Vimal released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear in court, not commit offenses, and not tamper with evidence.

Vimal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:32575

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 780 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Vimal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Divedi,Ajeet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶7

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

¶8

2 . The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.114 of 2022, under Section 302 of IPC, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Hardoi.

¶9

3 . In terms of the FIR, it was alleged by the informant that the brother of the informant had died around 3 years ago and subsequently her sister-in-law Meena along with her four children started staying with the applicant as husband and wife and on the day of the incident, the sister-in-law of the informant was killed by the applicant by throttling with a Dupatta, which was witnessed by one of the son aged about nine years.

¶10

4 . In the light of the aforesaid allegations, the submission of the counsel for the applicant is that on account of the children being taken by the informant, a false statement was given by the son of the deceased against the applicant. He further argues that in terms of the recovery of Dupatta, the same was shown to be on the neck of the deceased at the time of the alleged recovery. He also draws my attention to the postmortem report, which is on record, which suggests the cause of death is ante mortem strangulation. It is also argued that the applicant is in custody since 20.03.2022 and has no criminal antecedents. He further argues that despite the charge being framed not even a single witness has been examined so far and the testimony of PW 1 is going on at present.

¶11

5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer.

¶12

6. Considering the submissions that the applicant has suffered pretrial detention of more than 2 years and only charge has been

¶13

framed; there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in near future coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 20.03.2022 and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶14

7. Let the applicant Vimal be released on bail in the abovesaid first information report number on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

Order Date :- 26.4.2024 akverma

¶19

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

Vimal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vimal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. U.P.

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

Ashok Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and Others

Mathura Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Neeraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and 3 Others

Maulana Ashfaq Vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Ajay Pratap Singh @ Ajay Sipahi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Alagu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.