Suresh Singh vs State Of U.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 12697 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 79
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33264 of 2020
 

 
Applicant :- Suresh Singh
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Mahadeo Singh Chandel,Ram Raksha Tiwari
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

Supplementary affidavit filed today which is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 59 of 2019, under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Banda, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR. The name of the applicant surfaced in the statement of one Shiyaram, who has disclosed the name of applicant for the first time during investigation. He has stated that the applicant and Suresh Vishwakarma are friend and after murder of Brijesh Viswakarma, the present applicant surrendered before the court and is in jail deliberately. It is further submitted that prior to 14-15 days ago, the deceased hurled abuse to the applicant. The statement of Roshani daughter of the deceased was recorded, in which she has indicated the name of applicant. Statement of Suresh Viswakarma is recorded who has confessed his involvement in the murder of the deceased and also disclosed the name of the applicant. The prosecution has examined P.W. 1 Smt. Ranno, P.W. 2 Km. Roshani which is placed on record. It is further stated that the criminal history of the applicant of 22 cases has been explained in supplementary affidavit.The applicant is languishing in jail since11.07.2020. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the involvement of the applicant is found on the basis of statements recorded during investigation. Statement of P.W. 1 Ranno wife of deceased and P.W. 2 Roshani, daughter of the deceased were recorded during trial, in which they have given statements against the applicant. He has a criminal history of as much as 22 cases including heinous offence.

In view of judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Neeru Yadav vs. State of U.P. and another (2015) 3 SCC 527, criminal antecedents of the accused cannot be ignored while deciding bail application, discretionary powers of Courts to grant bail must be exercised in a judicious manner in case of a habitual offender.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced on behalf of parties, gravity of the offence and severity of the punishment, I do not find any good ground to grant bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.

Order Date :- 25.4.2023

v.k.updh.