In this bail application, the Hon'ble Court granted bail to the applicant, Sanjay Omar, in a case involving multiple IPC sections. The Court considered the nature of accusation, severity of punishment, and larger mandate of Article 21, while referring to a Supreme Court dictum.
Release of the applicant on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37182 of 2018 Applicant :- Sanjay Omar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Tripathi,Vikas Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jitendra Prasad Mishra
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Atul Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material brought on record.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant has been falsely implicated due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the applicant and other co-accused of the FIR dated 4.8.2017 approached this Hon'ble Court by filing a Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17263 of 2017 (Sanjay Omar & 3 others Vs. State of U.P. ad 2 ors.) and this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 23.8.2017 sent the matter before the Mediation Centre of this Court and till then stayed no coercive action against the applicant and other. A copy of the order dated 23.8.2017 in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 17263 is annexed as annexure no. 2 to this affidavit filed in support of this bail application. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. Further submission is that applicant who is in jail since 20.08.2018, has no other criminal history and there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant also undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.
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.
Let applicant Sanjay Omar , be released on bail in Case Crime No. 24 of 2017, under Sections 354-D, 498-A, 342, 504, 506 and 313 IPC, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- District-Banda, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of
magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will
not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
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.
Order Date :- 9.10.2018/SKG
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail ought to be granted to the applicant in the instant criminal proceeding.
Whether the applicant satisfies the requirements of bail under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶7
(2018) 2 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Sanjay Omar
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
