Allowed¶12

Khempal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Feb 2025BAIL/872/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted under S. 439 CrPC on parity; Allahabad HC, Sanjay Kumar Singh J.; CRL.M. Bail Appln. 872/2025, order dt. 24.2.2025; applicant Khempal; CC No. 258/2022, Ss. 302 & 506 IPC, PS Loni Border, Ghaziabad; murder of Suraj by knife injury by co-accused Vishal at barat night of 22.04.2022; FIR delayed to 26.04.2022; informant earlier stated non-eyewitness to SI Hukam Chand on 23.04.2022; co-accused Vishal bailed 03.03.2023 in Bail Appln. 44450/2022; personal bond + two sureties; conditions incl. no tampering; observations confined to bail stage.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Khempal to be released on bail in Case Crime No. 258 of 2022 on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to imposed conditions; bail cancellable on breach of conditions. ¶12

Khempal vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether applicant Khempal, involved in Case Crime No. 258 of 2022 under Sections 302, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Loni Border, district Ghaziabad, is entitled to enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.

¶7

Court's answer

The applicant's case stands on better footing than that of co-accused Vishal, who had already been granted bail; accordingly, the Court held that a prima facie case for bail on the ground of parity was made out.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

The bail application was allowed and the applicant Khempal was ordered to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions including cooperation in expeditious disposal of the trial, regular attendance, no inducement/tampering with evidence, no involvement in criminal activity after release, and verification of sureties; breach entitles the court concerned to cancel bail.

¶13

Key takeaways

Anything said in the order is limited to determination of the bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits; the trial court is absolutely free to arrive at independent conclusions unaffected by the order.¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Singh, J.) allowed a Section 439 Cr.P.C. bail application of applicant Khempal in Case Crime No. 258 of 2022 under Sections 302, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Loni Border, district Ghaziabad, concerning the death of Suraj, who suffered a knife injury allegedly inflicted by co-accused Vishal while the applicant allegedly caught hold of him during a barat on the night of 22.04.2022. Counsel argued the informant first told S.I. Hukam Chand on 23.04.2022 that he was not an eyewitness, and the FIR was lodged only on 26.04.2022 after the post-mortem, assigning the knife-injury role to Vishal and catching-hold role to the applicant. Relying on parity with co-accused Vishal, granted bail by the same Court on 03.03.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 44450 of 2022, and noting the Additional Government Advocate did not dispute the factual aspects, the Court found the applicant's case on better footing, held a prima facie case for bail on parity, and ordered release on a personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions (expeditious cooperation in trial, regular attendance, no inducement or tampering, no criminal activity, verification of sureties), with liberty to cancel bail on breach. Observations were expressly confined to the bail determination and not an expression on merits.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:25825

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 872 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Khempal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Tej Kulshrestha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State.

¶7

By means of this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., applicant-Khempal, who is involved in Case Crime No. 258 of 2022, under Sections 302, 506 I.P.C., police station Loni Border, district Ghaziabad, seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.

¶8

As per prosecution case, in brief, informant, who is brother of the deceased, lodged the first information report of this case on 26.04.2022 against co-accused Vishal and present applicant Khempal with regard to an incident which took place in the night of 22.04.2022 in the marriage of Bablu (friend of informant), in which the accused persons, without any invitation entered in the procession ( barat ), therefore, informant and his brother forcibly took them away from the procession, on which applicantKhempal caught his brother Suraj and co-accusedVishal caused knife injury to him. Injured Suraj was taken to G.T.B. Hospital, Delhi by the informant but on reaching there, the doctors declared him as brought dead.

¶9

Main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that statement of informant was recorded on 23.04.2022 by S.I. Hukam Chand, wherein he has stated that he was not an eyewitness of the incident and he reached at the spot later on. Post-mortem of the deceased was conducted on 23.04.2022 and after seeing the nature

¶10

of injury, the first information report was lodged on 26.04.2022 twisting the prosecution case assigning the role of causing knife injury against co-accusedVishal and role of catching hold to the present applicant-Khempal. It is also pointed out that considering the fact that informant has come up with two different stands with regard to the incident in question, co-accused Vishal has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 03.03.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 44450 of 2022, a copy of said bail order has been annexed as Annexure No. 8 to the bail application, hence, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit. Lastly, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.04.2022 and in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial.

¶11

Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but could not dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find substance in the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that case of the applicant stands on better footing than that of co-accused Vishal who has been granted bail as noted above, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant has made out a prima facie case for bail on the ground of parity. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant- Khempal , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

(i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.

¶15

(ii) That 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

(iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity.

¶17

(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶19

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶20

Order Date :- 24.2.2025 Kashifa

¶21

Digitally signed by :- KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Khempal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khempal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. vs Ranu and 3 Others

Khushhal vs State of Up and Another

Navneet Bhadauria @ Navneet Bhadauriya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Kuldeep Gond vs State of U.P.

Ajay Rai vs State of U.P. and Another

Imtiyaj Khan @ Imtiyaj Ahmad @ Intiyaj Ahamad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another