Dinanath vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:60784

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9202 of 2025

Applicant :- Dinanath Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Shri Brijesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Pradeep Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the Staterespondent.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.542 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 238(a), 217, Police Station AIIMS, District Gorakhpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is the informant of the case and he lodged the FIR of the present case against unknown persons with regard to murder of his son but during investigation, he himself has been made accused in the present matter.

¶10

He further submits that it appears, as deceased used to fight with the applicant and applicant several times scolded him, therefore, during investigation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter.

¶11

He further submits, however, Vivek Paswan, another son of the

¶12

applicant, has stated in his statement that applicant had taken the deceased on the motorcycle but he returned alone but his statement, which has been annexed at page 27 of the paper book, does not appear to be convincing.

¶13

He further submits that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no cogent evidence, which can connect the applicant with the instant crime.

¶14

He further submits that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 16.11.2024 i.e. for last more than five months.

¶15

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶16

I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶17

From the record, it reflects, applicant is the informant of the case and during investigation, he has been made accused in the present matter and it appears, his another son Vivek Pawan tried to give evidence of last seen against him but this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that his statement does not appear to be convincing.

¶18

Further, it is a case of circumstantial evidence and from the entire material available on record, it could not be reflected that there is any cogent evidence against the applicant on record, which can suggest that applicant involved in the instant crime.

¶19

Further, applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 16.11.2024 i.e. for last more than five months.

¶20

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case,

¶21

discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶22

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶23

Let the applicant- Dinanath , be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶24

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶25

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶26

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶27

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶28

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶29

Order Date :- 22.4.2025 Zafar

¶30

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dinanath v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinanath 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

Ranjeet vs State of U.P.

Ram Asare vs State of U.P.

Alok Kumar Jain Alias Alok Jain vs State of U.P.

Ram Naresh Sahu vs State of U.P.

Bhagat Singh vs State of U.P.

Shamshad Hussain vs State of U.P.