Allowed

Anuj Alias Anuj Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC7 Aug 2024BAIL/8408/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application in a murder case under IPC sections involving the applicant and co-accused, the Hon'ble Court allowed the bail application. The absence of independent witnesses in recovery and lack of witness examination were key considerations for granting bail.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of a like amount, with conditions to attend hearings, not commit similar offences, and not tamper with evidence.

Anuj Alias Anuj Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:54108

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8408 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Anuj Alias Anuj Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Gauri Suwan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.74 of 2023 under sections 364, 302, 201 read with section 34, 120-B IPC, P.S. BBD, District Lucknow.

¶8

It is argued by the counsel for the applicant that two of the co-accused were enlarged on bail vide order dated 18.03.2024 and order dated 30.05.2024.

¶9

While arguing the case of the applicant, it is argued by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant was linked with the offence in question and was alleged to have caused the injuries based upon the statement of the co-accused Manoj Kumar who has been enlarged on bail. He further argues that the recovery of the weapon allegedly was done at the instance and pointing out of the applicant as well as the co-accused Manoj Kumar.

¶10

In short, the submission is that apart from the confessional statement and the recovery, which is not in the presence of any independent witnesses, the applicant has been linked with the offence in question. It is lastly argued that the applicant is in custody since 13.03.2023 and not even one witness has been examined so far and the applicant has no criminal history.

¶11

Considering the fact that the co-accused has been enlarged on bail although the role assigned to the applicant is different from the co-accused Manoj Kumar, however, the fact remains that the applicant has been linked with the offence in question based upon the last seen theory, confessional statement and the recovery which is not in the presence of any independent witnesses. It also cannot be ignored that not even a single witness has been examined and the applicant is in custody since 13.03.2023, as such, considering these facts, the applicant who has no criminal history is entitled for the bail. Thus the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Anuj Alias Anuj Yadav be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned 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

Order Date :- 7.8.2024

¶17

VNP/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anuj Alias Anuj Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuj Alias Anuj Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. 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

Raghuvar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Shiva Nand Verma @ Shiva Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Chaman Verma @ Arvind Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

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

U.P. Co-Operative Sugar Factories Federation Ltd. Thru. Its Managing Director vs Regional Employees Provident Fund Commissioner,Gorakhpur and 3 Others