Allowed

Sarvesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Apr 2019BAIL/13698/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application, the court allowed the release of the applicant who was charged with murder and affray in a group violence case. The applicant contended parity with co-accuses already on bail, lack of criminal antecedents, and no independent witness against him. The court accepted these submissions and granted bail subject to standard conditions without adjudicating the merits of th

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence and appearing in court.

Sarvesh Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13698 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Sarvesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Vakalatnama filed today by S/Sri S.K. Pandey and R.K. Dubey, Advocate on behalf of the complainant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, Sri Kamlesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶7

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against eight accused persons, namely, Subhash, Sarvesh, Amitesh, Akhilesh, Prashant, Prabhat, Sachin and Rajveer alleging that on 11.11.2018, they assaulted Ajay Kumar @ Munna with iron rods, lathies-dandas, he received three injuries, two are on head, resultantly died. One danda was recovered from the possession of Subhash and 'Belchas' was recovered from possession of Akhilesh and Amitesh without bloodstained.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that coaccused Sachin Kumar, Amitesh, Prabhat and Subhash have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 14.2.2019, 12.3.2019 and 13.3.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 3329 of 2019, 10597 of 2019, 10591 of 2019 and 10788 of 2019 and the case of the applicant is identical to the case of co-accused, who has been enlarged on bail, hence the applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.11.2018 (more than four months) criminal history of two cases has been properly explained. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. General role has been assigned to applicant. It is not clear who is author of head injuries due to which he died. There was previous enmity between the accused and the complainant in which four persons had received injuries from the side of the applicant but case was not registered. There is no independent witness against the applicant. There is no eye witness account against the applicant and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not

¶11

dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history and the case of the present applicant is identical to the case of co-accused Sachin Kumar, Amitesh, Prabhat and Subhash, who has been enlarged on bail.

¶12

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.

¶13

Let the applicant Sarvesh involved in Case Crime No. 166 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 302, 149 IPC, Police Station Amritpur, District Farrukhabad 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:

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

4.The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶18

5.The applicant 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.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 3.4.2019 A. Singh

Sarvesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarvesh 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

monu Vs State of U.P.

Kripashankar Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ashish @ Shobhi Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Chandra Prakash @ Chandu Vs State of U.P.