Allowed

Sanjeev Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Sept 2018BAIL/36110/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 506 IPC, the court granted bail to the applicant citing parity with co-accused and considering the reformative theory of punishment to prevent witness tampering.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each and complying with specific conditions regarding trial attendance and witness protection.

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

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36110 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Agarwal,Naveen Kumar Yadav

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the co-accused Surendra @ Ghota and Mintu @ Titu have been granted bail by another Bench of this Court on 10.1.2018 and 8.3.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.49092 of 2017 and 3726 of 2018, a copy of said orders has been annexed as annexure-9 to the affidavit accompanying this bail application, 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 6.8.2018.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment , the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶10

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Sanjeev Kumar involved in Case Crime No.930 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sector-49 NOIDA, District Gautam Budh Nagar be released on bail on his furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following

¶11

conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶13

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial Court on the date fixed.

¶14

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 24.9.2018 Dev/-

Sanjeev Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjeev Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satish Patel Vs State of U.P.

Praveen Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rishabh Verma Vs State of U.P.

Izharul Vs State of U.P.

Yusuf Vs State of U.P.

Junaid Vs State of U.P.