Allowed

Satish v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Jan 2019BAIL/2205/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed Criminal Misc. Bail Application filed by Satish, an accused in a case involving the death of a deceased following an assault. Bail was granted as a co-accused with an identical role had already been enlarged on bail, and no specific evidence cum incriminating circumstances against the applicant were found.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Satish released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2205 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Satish Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Maurya,Pankaj Satsangi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Rai, brief holder for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against three accused persons, namely Pradeep, Kulbhushan and Satis alleging that on 13.10.2018 at 7 p.m. they assaulted Ritu aged about 20 years, she received one head injury, resultantly died.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that coaccused namely Pradeep Kumar has already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.12.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 48726 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. There are general allegations against all accused persons. It is not clear from the prosecution case, who is the author of head injury due to which she died. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 17.10.2018 (three months) criminal history of two cases has been properly explained and in case he is released on bail, he 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 applicant and admitted that criminal history has been explained and the case of present applicant is identical to co-accused Pradeep Kumar who has been enlarged on bail.

¶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 applicant Satish involved in Case Crime No. 600 of 2018, under Sections 304, 504 IPC, Police Station Bilsi, District Budaun be released on bail on furnishing a

¶11

personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶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 :- 17.1.2019

¶19

A. Singh

Satish v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramkaran Vs State of U.P.

Sajid Vs State of U.P.

Vicky Vs State of U.P.

Phulmati Vs State of U.P.

Sharda Prasad Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Vs State of U.P.