Criminal Misc. Bail Application where the applicant sought release on bond. The Court, noting lack of criminal history, no independent witnesses, and release of co-accused, allowed the bail petition and imposed standard conditions.
Released on bail by executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties each.
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. - 22 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6699 of 2018 Applicant :- Satendra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
According to the prosecution case the F.I.R. was lodged against 40-45 unknown persons alleging that they assaulted four persons, namely, Vinod Kumar, Malkhan Singh, Akash and Khilender Singh; they received injuries, all injuries received by them are simple in nature.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; the incident took place between two groups of student at the spur of moment; there is no evidence of fracture on the body of the injured; no injury of firearm was found on the body of any injured; general role has been assigned against all the accused; there is no independent witness against this accused; in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial; he is in jail since 11.12.2017 (more than two months) having no criminal history. Co-accused namely Satish Kumar and Yogendra Singh and Sunil Kumar have been granted bail by this Court on 30.1.2018 and 2.2.2018 vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 3193 of 2018 and 3847 of 2018; since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and admitted that he has received no criminal history against the applicant.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Satendra involved in the Case Crime No. 431 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 323, 427, 307 I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S. Pakbada, District Moradabad be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iii) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which applicant is suspected.
iv) The applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicant from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 22.2.2018//A. Singh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under the given circumstances.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Satendra
Aniruddha Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
