Allowed

Sandeep v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Sept 2019BAIL/14273/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to the applicant having no prior criminal history. The court relied on the statement of the injured discrediting the applicant as the causa of injury and cited the Supreme Court dictum. Bail granted with standard and specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions regarding prosecution witnesses and evidence.

Sandeep Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14273 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Sandeep Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Shukla,V.K. Agnihotri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Bind

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Anil Kumar Bind, learned counsel for the informant.

¶6

A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the informant, wherein statement of the injured, Km. Pratiksha, has been brought on record. She has been examined as PW 1 in S.T. No.108 of 2019 and has stated that the applicant, Sandeep, did not caused any knife injury to her. In view of the statement of the injured that the knife was not caused to the injured by the applicant, he may be enlarged on bail. He is in jail since 23.10.2018 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶7

On the other hand learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted herein above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant Sandeep involved in Case Crime No.68 of 2018, under Sections 307, 504 IPC, Police Station Labedi, District- Etawah be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶10

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during

¶11

the trial.

¶12

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶17

Order Date :- 11.9.2019 SS

Sandeep v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mungeri Lal @ Mauhar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Shaukin Vs State of U.P.

Chand Vs State of U.P.

Vipin Kumar @ Pappi Vs State of U.P.

Chameli Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Chameli Devi Vs State of U.P.