Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Surendra Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

Home
Allahabad HC
2019
Surendra Vs State of U.P.Surendra v. State of U.P.

Allowed

Surendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Jan 2019BAIL/2224/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh, J. allowed the bail application filed by Surendra, holding it a fit case in the absence of factors warranting rejection.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with sureties subject to conditions regarding tampering, intimidation, appearance, and committing no new offence.

What the court decided

AI extract

A

Court No. - 50

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2224 of 2019

Applicant :- Surendra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rama Shankar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

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

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged on 9.7.2018 (after four days of incident) against four accused persons, namely Ajaypal, Surendra, Jitan and Tikaram alleging that on 5.7.2018 they assaulted Manju with lathidanda and iron rod, she received two injuries, one on head, resultantly died.During trial, P.W. 1 complainant Ram Singh was examined, he stated that Ajay Pal and Jeetan armed with lathi and head injury was caused by co-accused Ajay Pal due to which she died.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The role of the applicant was catching hold only. Main role of causing head injury was assigned to coaccused Ajay Pal. There is no independent witness against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. He is languishing in jail since 10.7.2018 (more than six month) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
Surendra
respondent
State Of U.P.

Coram

AI extract

Aniruddha Singh

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Allahabad HC
Decided on: 17 Jan 2019 · January
Registered: 16 Jan 2019
Case no.: BAIL/2224/2019

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Aniruddha Singh

Ramkaran Vs State of U.P.
16 Jan 2019
Sajid Vs State of U.P.
16 Jan 2019
Vicky Vs State of U.P.
16 Jan 2019
Satish Vs State of U.P.
17 Jan 2019
Phulmati Vs State of U.P.

Cite this judgement

Surendra v. State of U.P., BAIL/2224/2019 (ALL), decided on 17 January 2019.

The Allahabad High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Bench / Coram

Aniruddha Singh

Parties & counsel

Outcome

Released on bail with sureties subject to conditions regarding tampering, intimidation, appearance, and committing no new offence.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Application for bail granted as a fit case after considering submissions regarding innocence, lack of independent witnesses, no criminal history, and cooperation in trial, without prejudging merits or facts.

A compact analysis

This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.

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 applicant has no criminal history.

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.

Let applicant Surendra involved in Case Crime No. 830 of 2018, under Sections 304, 323 IPC, Police Station Khurja Nagar, District Bulandshahar 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:

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

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

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

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.

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.

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

Order Date :- 17.1.2019

A. Singh

CNR

UPHC010101312019

Topic

Bail and Remand

Bench

Aniruddha Singh

Disposal

Allowed/Partly Allowed on merits

17 Jan 2019

Sharda Prasad Sharma Vs State of U.P.

17 Jan 2019