The Court granted bail to the applicant based on parity with a co-accused previously granted bail, citing the larger mandate of Article 21 and the ruling in Dataram Singh without expressing an opinion on the case merits.
Aptce allowed release on bail with personal bonds, two sureties, and specific conditions against tampering and intimidation.
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. - 41135 of 2018
Applicant :- Jay Prakash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I appearing for the State.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the co-accused Bhola @ Jai Shiv has been granted bail by another Bench of this Court on 21.12.2017 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.50190 of 2017, a copy of said order has been annexed as annexure-4 to the affidavit accompanying this bail application 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 31.10.2017.
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.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another , reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any view on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Jay Prakash involved in Case Crime No.1040 of 2017, under Sections 307, 504 I.P.C. Police Station Sikandara, District Agra 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 conditions:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
witness.
(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial Court on the date fixed.
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 27.10.2018 Dev/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail on the ground of parity with a co-accused who was already granted bail.
Whether the applicant can be released on bail without expressing a view on the merits of the underlying case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶8
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Jay Prakash
State Of U.P.
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
