Allowed

Dhiru @ Dhirendra v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home , Lko.

Allahabad HC23 Sept 2024BAIL/10129/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application challenging the legal propriety of termination of probation and regularisation of the probationer Officer/Officer-in-charge of the Anjuman Uloom Jamiyah Dar ul-Uloom Deoband.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on personal bond and two sureties of equal amount with conditions to attend hearings and not tamper with evidence.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:65808

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10129 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Dhiru @ Dhirendra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home , Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and Sri Mahendra Pratap Singh, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant and perused the record. The Vakalatnama is taken on record.

¶7

2 . The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.201 of 2024, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Pisawan, District Sitapur.

¶8

3 . In terms of the FIR registered on 15.06.2024, it was alleged that the brother of the informant aged about 40 years was employed as Watchman to the orchard. It was also alleged that one side of the orchard the brother of the informant was lying down and on the other side, the purchasers of the fruits are lying down and on 14.06.2024 at about 11:30 PM, some unknown person had killed the brother of the informant by any sharp instrument. No one was named in the FIR.

¶9

4 . In the light of the aforesaid, it is argued by the Counsel for the applicant that the applicant was linked with the offence in question based upon the statement of the daughter of the deceased recorded after about 25 days on 09.08.2024, wherein, she stated that on 09.08.2024 at about 8:30 AM when she was going to purchase vegetables, the applicant stopped her and threatened her that the way the father of the said witness was done to death, she would also be done to death. Solely based upon the said statement, the applicant was apprehended and a confessional statement was recorded, wherein, the applicant admitted to have caused the death by throttling the victim through a Danda . In the light of the said, the Counsel for the applicant argues that the statement of the daughter was recorded after about 25 days, in which, she did not state that the applicant had committed the offence. He further argues that the postmortem report on record indicates the presence on abrasion injury all around the neck, which cannot be the caused by the

¶10

use of wooden stick as recorded in the confessional statement of the applicant.

¶11

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

¶12

6. Considering the material on record, prima facie, the applicant has been linked with the offence in question based upon two statements, one by the daughter of the deceased and the other being a confessional statement and both the statements did not corroborate the postmortem report and also considering the evidence to link the applicant to be a weak piece of evidence coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 10.08/.2024. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

7. Let the applicant Dhiru @ Dhirendra 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:

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

Order Date :- 23.9.2024 akverma

¶18

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

Dhiru @ Dhirendra v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home , Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhiru @ Dhirendra v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home , 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

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

Imarn @ Chand Babu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Mohd. Aleem Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Babu Ram Pal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Sectt. Lko

Deshraj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and others

Ramkali vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko