Allowed

Ramesh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2024BAIL/330/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application for an accused charged with murder under Section 302 IPC where evidence was largely circumstantial: a custodial confession and recovery of a danda without independent witnesses, and P.W.1 did not support prosecution during trial. Applicant had no criminal history and had been jailed since 28.05.2023. Bail was granted subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to standard conditions including no tampering or witness pressure.

Ramesh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:6040

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 330 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.162 of 2023, under Section 302 I.P.C., P.S. Vishesharganj, District Bahraich.

¶8

It is alleged in the F.I.R. that informant was told by the villagers on 24.05.2023 at 09:00 pm that his husband Devtadeen is lying toward north of the village near a pond when she reached on the spot, she found her husband dead. Blood was oosing out from the right temple. Some unknown persons have committed his murder.

¶9

Learned counsel for applicant submits that apart from the confessional statement of the applicant himself in police custody and recovery of a danda on his pointing out, there is no other evidence against him, there is no eye witness to the incident. The case is of circumstantial evidence. P.W.1 during cross-examination before the trial court has not supported the prosecution case. The applicant is in jail since 28.05.2023.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer and has submitted that applicant had motive as he was illicit relations with the wife of the deceased and this has been corroborated by the statement of the independent witnesses.

¶11

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 28.05.2023, P.W.1 has not supported the prosecution case during trial and apart from the confessional statement and the recovery of a danda without there being any independent witness, there is no other material against the applicant so also the fact that he has no criminal history, without expressing any

¶12

opinion on 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 Ramesh Kumar be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶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 :- 19.1.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶22

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

Ramesh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. 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

Pawan Rathore and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Jamal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

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

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