Allowed

Pappu @ Rafi Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Sept 2024ABAIL/2194/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the High Court, relying on Shahzad and Sushila Aggarwal, allowed the applicant's prayer. The court noted the applicant was previously on bail for lesser sections before Section 307 IPC was added. The applicant was directed to surrender before the trial court within 20 days subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; direction to surrender before trial court within 20 days on furnishing personal bond and two sureties.

Pappu @ Rafi Khan vs State of U.P. Thru… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2194 of 2024 Applicant :- Pappu @ Rafi Khan

¶2

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

¶3

Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

The applicant has moved the present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying for grant of anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 29/2021, under Section 307 IPC, P.S. Utraula, District Balrampur.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the applicant with an intent to kill has badly beaten the victim with lathi and danda and due to that he received injuries on the head as well as on the other part of the body. Three injuries have been found on the body of the victim. Doctor who examined the injured has stated that the victim has received grievous injuries and his temporal bone is fractured.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was arrested after lodging of the FIR and he was sent to jail. He was enlarged on regular bail under Section 323/504/506/308 IPC. Thereafter while framing charge, section 307 IPC has been added. He also submits that charge sheet has already been filed. The investigation is over. No useful purpose will be served by sending the applicant behind the bar. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court "Shahzad Vs. State of U.P., 2022 SCC online All 2219".

¶9

It is submitted that the applicant is innocent. The applicant has

¶10

never absconded. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

¶11

Two weeks' time is granted to the learned AGA to file objections/ counter affidavit.

¶12

Issue notice to respondent No.2.

¶13

List on 22.10.2024.

¶14

On due consideration to the fact that the applicant was enlarged on bail in the earlier sections; while framing charge, new section has been added, thus considering the judgment of Shahzad (supra) as well as the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case in the light of judgment of Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 , subject to his cooperation in the trial.

¶15

In view of the above, the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court within twenty days from today. The accused applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the following conditions.

¶16

(i) 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 tamper with the evidence;

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶18

(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶19

(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶20

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶21

It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶22

Order Date :- 24.9.2024 R.C.

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Pappu @ Rafi Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu @ Rafi Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shiv Pratap vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Rohit Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko

Sandeep Patel vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Uma Shankar Tiwari vs State of U.P. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Amar Bahadur Gautam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ram Achhayabar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another