Allowed

Chand v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Aug 2018BAIL/29140/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the bail application of the applicant based on parity with a co-accused already released on bail. The applicant was granted bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and specific conditions including appearing before the trial court and not tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions.

Chand Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29140 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Chand Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

The argument is that the co-accused Prafull Sarkar has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 26.07.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.27804 of 2018. The prayer for release of the applicant on bail on the ground of parity has been made. The applicant is languishing in jail since 28.05.2018.

¶7

On the other hand learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the fact that the identically placed co-accused has already been released on bail by this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that it is a fit case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant Chand , involved in case crime No.455 of 2018, under sections 382, 411, 34 I.P.C and under Section 136 Electricity Act, Police Station Surajpur, District Gautam Budh Nagar 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 that :-

¶10

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶11

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶12

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶13

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected of the commission of which they are suspected.

¶14

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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶16

Order Date :- 3.8.2018 SS

Chand v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chand v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saudan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Jabar Singh @ Amar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Dau Dayal Vs State of U.P.

Mahesh Singh Vs State of U.P.

Najim Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of U.P.