Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Pushpendra Alias Kallu vs State Of U.P.

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|18 February, 2021

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
This is the second bail application filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure by the applicant Puspendra @ Kallu seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 59 of 2017, (Sessions Trial No.181 of 2017) under Sections 302, 201 and 120-B I.P.C., registered at Police Station Ramala, District Baghpat.
First bail application of the applicant has been rejected by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.02.2018.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case; that the occurrence in the present case is of 17.2.2017 for which FIR was lodged on 18.2.2017 against unknown persons. In the statement of first informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the applicant is not named but a suspicion has been raised by the first informant that the murder of his brother Adesh Kumar was committed by his partner with other persons. Subsequently a supplementary statement of the first informant was recorded on 5.3.2017, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-6 to the affidavit in which he has stated that the accused persons had come to him and had given an extra judicial confession that they have committed the murder of Adesh Kumar; that there is no evidence to connect the applicant with the aforesaid offence; that in this case trial is still in process and only three witnesses have been examined. There are other prosecution witnesses, who are to be examined. It may linger the proceedings; that the first informant Tarun Saini appeared as P.W.1, who did not level any specific allegation against the applicant; statements of prosecution witnesses does not transpires any confidence; that nothing incriminating has been recovered either from the possession or on the pointing out of the applicant and the recovery has been shown from the joint possession of the accused-persons and the same has been planted; that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail 10.03.2017; that co-accused namely Sunil and Vipul have also been granted bail by co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 31.01.2020 and 06.03.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.4289 of 2020 and 54854 of 2019 respectively and co-accused Prabhash was already granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.02.2018.
Learned A.G.A has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail.
Keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without touching the merits of the case in my opinion the accused applicant is entitled for bail.
Let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, shall cooperate in the investigation or trial and will not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
2. In case of breach of any of the conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
3. However, if due to Covid-19 pandemic, the Sub-ordinate Court is under lockdown, the applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused till furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts is restored.
4. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
5. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
It is made clear that in the event the Sub-ordinate Court is functional as usual then the normal procedure/mode of filing bail bonds and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned will be adopted.
Order Date :- 18.2.2021 Asha
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Pushpendra Alias Kallu vs State Of U.P.

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
18 February, 2021
Judges
  • Umesh Kumar