Allowed

Amrendra Kumar Rawat Alias Arvind Kumar v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Allahabad HC1 Apr 2024BAIL/3382/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a second bail application for an accused in a murder case, noting the applicant's four-year pre-trial detention, lack of criminal history, absence of eye witnesses, and insufficient prima facie material linking the accused.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on personal bonds with conditions to attend hearings, not commit similar offences, not tamper with evidence, and report to SHO every two months.

Amrendra Kumar Rawat Alias Arvind Kumar vs State of U.P… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:46956

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3382 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Amrendra Kumar Rawat Alias Arvind Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Nath Pandey,Rahul Srivastava,Satish Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

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

¶7

2 . This is the second bail application. The first bail application was rejected on 22.09.2022.

¶8

3 . While arguing the second bail application, the counsel for the applicant argues that in terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the family of the informant has gone to attend the marriage ceremony, when one of the daughter of the informant, who was differently abled was lying dead. It was further stated that an information was received that earlier on 19.06.2022 when the informant and his wife had gone out of home, the applicant had come and was misbehaving with the other daughter of the informant which was resisted and the applicant ran away after issuing threats and based upon the said, it was apprehended that the applicant had committed the offence in question, there are no eye witnesses to the incident. It is argued that the applicant is in custody since 07.07.2020 and there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in near future. It is further argued that in terms of the statement of the sister recorded during trial, she had also expressed her suspicion against the applicant, thus beyond the suspicion expressed in

¶9

the FIR and the statement, prima facie, material to link the applicant is not evident.

¶10

4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer.

¶11

5. Considering these facts coupled with the fact that the applicant has suffered pre trial detention of four years, he has no criminal history and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial and without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶12

6. Let the applicant Amrendra Kumar Rawat Alias Arvind Kumar be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 233 of 2020, under Sections 302, 201 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Rudauli, District Ayodhya, on his furnishing only personal bonds as the applicants are very poor and are unable to furnish sureties with the following conditions:

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

(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.

¶16

(d) The applicant shall report to the S.H.O., Police Station after every two months.

¶17

Order Date :- 10.7.2024 Arun

¶18

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

Amrendra Kumar Rawat Alias Arvind Kumar v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amrendra Kumar Rawat Alias Arvind Kumar v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. 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

Suleman Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Shivam Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Arvind Verma Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Bheem Sen vs Bano and 2 Others

Smt. Maya Kushwaha and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Vakeel vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lko.