Allowed

Gaurav Saini Alias Bhola v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Jun 2018CRLA/1779/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against rejection of bail was allowed. The High Court found that a case for bail had been made out due to the appellant being falsely implicated and lack of evidence, setting aside the lower order and granting bail on conditions.

What did the court decide?

The order rejecting bail dated 20.3.2018 was set aside; applicant released on personal bond and two sureties against conditions.

Gaurav Saini Alias Bhola Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1779 of 2018

¶3

Appellant :- Gaurav Saini Alias Bhola Respondent :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Ruduvant Pratap Singh,Sunil Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This appeal has been filed against the order dated 20th March, 2018 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Saharanpur in Bail Application No. 524 of 2018, in Special Case No. 11 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. 423 of 2017, under Sections 366, 511, 354C, 34 I.P.C. and also under Section 3 (1) b(1) S.C./S.T. Act, Police StationSarsawa, District-Saharanpur, by which bail plea of appellant has been rejected.

¶7

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been languishing in Jail since 8th February, 2018. It is further submitted that though the appellant had not been named by the victim in her statement under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, subsequently, the appellant has been named by the victim in her statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. No one has been produced to prove the allegation of dragging the victim by her hand into the car by the appellant. It is, thus stated, that appellant has been falsely implicated in this case, therefore, he may be released on bail.

¶8

Having heard the submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation against appellant and evidence in support of it and unlikelihood of conclusion of trial in near future, I find that a case for bail has been made out.

¶9

In the result, appeal is allowed. The order dated 20th March, 2018 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Saharanpur is set aside.

¶10

Let appellant-applicant-Gaurav Sani @ Bhola be released on bail in aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶11

(i) The applicant-appellant will co-operate with the trial and

¶12

remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 7.6.2018

¶17

Sushil/-

Gaurav Saini Alias Bhola v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gaurav Saini Alias Bhola 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Najir Hasan and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and and 1 Ors.

Komal Mallah Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Rajmani Vs Sarita Devi and 6 Ors.

Smt. Lata Devi Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohd. Kasim and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bittu Ram and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.