Allowed

Ram Babu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC29 Jan 2024BAIL/984/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the applicant in a murder case. The court granted bail citing parity of grounds with other co-accused who had already been enlarged on bail, despite the applicant not being named in the original FIR.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each subject to three specific conditions regarding attendance, non-commitment of offences, and non-interference with wi

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:8014

¶2

Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 984 of 2024 Applicant :- Ram Babu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Diwakar Singh,Urvashi Vishwakarma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶4

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

¶5

2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.148 of 2022, under Section 147, 302, 201/34 IPC, P.S. Haiderganj, District Faizabad/Ayodhya.

¶6

3. It is argued that the applicant was not named in the FIR. Subsequently, on the basis of a confessional statement, the applicant was linked with the offence in question. It is argued that one of the co-accused Vishnu @ Chhotu has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 12.01.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5711 of 2023. It is also argued that two other coaccused namely Manish Kumar Manjhi and Dilip Kumar Manjhi have also been enlarged on bail.

¶7

4. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶8

5. Considering the fact that the applicant was not named in the FIR and the coaccused with almost similar allegations have been enlarged on bail, the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶9

6. Let the applicant Ram Babu be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

(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.

¶13

Order Date :- 29.1.2024 nishant

¶14

Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Babu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Babu 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

Kuldeep @ Babu Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Addil. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Gautam Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

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

Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Pratipal Baheliya vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko.

Lakhvindar Singh vs State of Up through Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow