Allowed

Guddu Singh Sengar @ Raghvendra Singh and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Mar 2019BAIL/12036/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the bail application filed by two accused persons charged with offences under Sections 304, 272, 273, 420, etc., IPC and Section 60-Ka of the Excise Act, considering it a fit case for bail without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to standard conditions of bail.

Guddu Singh Sengar @ Raghvendra Singh and Another Vs… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12036 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Guddu Singh Sengar @ Raghvendra Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dheeraj Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

According to prosecution case, the F.I.R. was lodged against seven accused persons, namely, Satish Mishra, Satish Chandra, Sarwan, Budhdhe, Ramshwaroop Singh Gaur, Vinay Singh Gaur, Neeraj Singh Gaur alleging that they were selling illegal liquor, after consuming liquor six persons died. During investigation, the name of some persons including the applicants was surfaced.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. Their death was an accidental, unintentional and without knowledge of accused. There is no chemical examination report to show that recovered wine was adulterated. Offences under Sections 272 and 273 IPC are not made out against the applicants. There is no independent witness against the applicants. They are languishing in jail since 22.5.2018 (more than ten months). Criminal history of four cases have been explained. In case they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

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

¶9

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.

¶10

Let applicants Guddu Singh Sengar @ Raghvendra Singh and Chhunna Singh Sengar @ Satrudhan Singh involved in S.T. No. 268 of 2018 as well as Case Crime No. 143 of 2018, under Sections 304, 272, 273, 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 IPC and Section 60-Ka of the Excise Ac, Police Station Rura, District

¶11

Kanpur Dehat be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶12

The applicants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶13

2.The applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶14

3.The applicants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶15

4.The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

¶16

5.The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 27.3.2019

¶19

P.P.

Guddu Singh Sengar @ Raghvendra Singh and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu Singh Sengar @ Raghvendra Singh and Another 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepu Yadav @ Ajay Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Veer Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sukhdevi Vs State of U.P.

parmeshwar Vs State of U.P.

Suresh Chandra Vs State of U.P.

Upendra Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.