Allowed

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

Allahabad HC12 Jan 2024/816/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant in a murder case where prosecution witnesses turned hostile. The applicant had no prior criminal record and was not a flight risk. Conditional bail was granted to prevent tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and intimidation of witnesses.

Umesh Alias Sajan Panda Vs State of U.P… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:3854

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 816 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Umesh Alias Sajan Panda Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Pal Singh,Ambrish Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

In the FIR it is alleged that on 19.04.2022 between 8-9 pm, in the night, father of the informant was demanding moped motorcycle from brother of the informant Vinnu which he gifted to him for giving the informant on that date. In the meantime, Umesh @ Sajan Panda nephew of the informant had altercation with the father of the informant and he pushed him and because of that the father of the informant fell down. Thereafter, father of the informant assaulted him with danda which was in his hand and in retaliation thereto, the nephew of the informant Sajan @ Mahaveer Panda with a thick block of wood has assaulted on the head of the father of the informant and due to that assault, he died on the spot.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that PW-1 as well as wife of the PW-1 who are the alleged eye witness of the incident, have not supported the prosecution case in her statement before the trial court. Both have been declared hostile.

¶9

It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.04.2022 without having any criminal antecedent and there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, however, could not dispute the fact that both the alleged eye witnesses of the incident have turned hostile.

¶11

On due consideration to the fact that PW-1 and PW-2 eye witnesses of the alleged incident have turned hostile as well as considering the fact that applicant is languishing in jail since 20.04.2022 without having any criminal antecedent and without

¶12

expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant, Umesh Alias Sajan Panda, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 154/2022, under Sections 302 IPC, Police Station - Kotwali Dehat, District - Bahraich, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 12.1.2024 R.C.

¶22

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

Kuldeep Singh @ Kaka Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Haseeb Baba Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Riyaz Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home), Lucknow

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

Irshad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.