The High Court granted bail to Ravi Pal, accused in a criminal case involving murder and AFSPA offences. The court found that the FIR did not name the applicant and held that attenuating circumstances made out a case for bail.
The applicant is enlarged on bail by executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of equal amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BA1 No. 360 of 2014
Hon’ble U.C.Dhyani, J.
Mr. Virendra Kaparwan, Advocate, present for the applicant.
Mr. M.A.Khan, learned Deputy Advocate General, assisted by Mr. K.S.Rawal, Brief Holder, present for the State.
Mr. Vipul Sharma, Advocate, present for the private respondent.
Applicant, who is in jail in connection with Case Crime No. 539 of 2013, relating to offences punishable under Sections 147, 364 and 302 of IPC and Section 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, P.S. Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, has sought his release on bail.
An FIR was lodged against 6 named accused persons, but not against the present applicant, for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 364 and 302 of IPC.
It was alleged in the FIR that the accused persons took away informant’s son and assured the informant that his son will be dropped at his house in the night. The informant, believing that since a settlement has taken place between the parties, therefore, he would be returning soon, but the same could not happen, in as much as, his son was killed by the accused persons sometimes in the night.
Father of the deceased affirmed the contents of FIR in his statement u/S 161 Cr.P.C. Name of the present applicant did not emerge even in such statement.
Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the bail and submitted that it was Abrar Hussain, who saw the victim last in the company of applicant as well. Such statement of Abrar Hussain under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded after 12 days of the incident i.e. on 12.11.2013. Learned counsel for the complainant also contended that there was recovery of rings, motorcycle, weapon ( patal) and mobile from the possession of the present applicant.
Considering the facts of the case along with attenuating circumstances, a case of bail is made out in favour of the applicant. Let the applicant Ravi Pal be enlarged on bail in connection with Case Crime No. 539 of 2013, relating to offences under Sections 147, 364 and 302 of IPC and Section 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, P.S. Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the A.C.J.M. Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar.
Kaushal
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant charged with offences under Sections 147, 364, 302 of IPC and Section 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Ravi Pal
State of Uttar Pradesh
Hon'ble U.C.Dhyani, J.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
