Allowed

Dayanand Paswan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Sept 2018BAIL/34089/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application for offences under the Uttar Pradesh Excise Act and IPC, the High Court observed that parity existed with a co-accused who had been granted bail. Finding prima facie satisfaction regarding the reformative theory of punishment without expressing an opinion on the merits, the Court released the applicant on bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Respondent released on bail in Crime No.96 of 2018 subject to personal bond, two sureties, and conditions to not tamper with evidence or indulge in unlawful activities.

Dayanand Paswan Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34089 of 2018 Applicant :- Dayanand Paswan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Uday Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Uday Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhinav Prasad learned AGA appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶5

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that coaccused has been granted bail by this Court on 6.9.2018, in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 33871 of 2018, a copy of said order has been produced by the learned counsel for the applicant, which is taken on record and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 19.7.2018.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶7

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶8

Let applicant Dayanand Paswan, be released on bail in Case Crime No.96 of 2018, under Sections 60(2)/63 of Uttar Prdesh Utpad Shukl/Abkari Adhiniyam and 272/273 IPC, Police Station-Rewti, District- Ballia, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶9

(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release.

¶10

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶11

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶12

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶14

Order Date :- 7.9.2018/ssm

Dayanand Paswan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dayanand Paswan 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijendra Vs State of U.P.

Anit Kumar @ Jhandu Vs State of U.P.

Sabir Khan Vs State of U.P.

Usman Vs State of U.P.

Bal Kishun Vs State of U.P.

Ram Niwas and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.