Allowed

Omendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Jul 2019BAIL/26140/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 394, 411, 120B IPC, the court granted enlargement on bail to the applicant on the ground of parity with co-accused who were previously granted bail while imposing standard conditions regarding attendance, witness tampering, and illegal activities.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail subject to executing personal bond, two sureties, and specific conditions including attendance and no witness tampering.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26140 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Omendra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Usha Srivastava,Arjit Srivastava,Vinod Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 85 of 2019, under Sections 394, 411 and 120B I.P.C., P.S. Rajepur, district-Farrukhabad and is in jail since 6.5.2019, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was not named in the first information report. He is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some ulterior motive. He next submitted that all the offences are triable by the Court of Magistrate. Further submission is that similarly placed co-accused Pannalal Pal and Sani Katiyar have already been enlarged on bail by this Court as well as by coordinate Bench of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 24283 of 2019 and 24767 of 2019, copy of the bail orders produced by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused Pannalal Pal and Sani Katiyar who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of merits as well as parity.

¶8

The prayer for bail has vehemently been opposed by learned A.G.A.

¶9

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail on the ground of parity.

¶10

In view of the above, let the applicant, Omendra be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in Case Crime No. 85 of 2019, under Sections 394, 411 and 120B I.P.C., P.S. Rajepur, district-Farrukhabad with the following conditions :-

¶11

The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶12

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶13

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶14

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 2.7.2019 Faridul

Omendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Omendra 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

Shukhendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Devesh @ K.K. Vs State of U.P.

Rameshwar Singh Yadav @ Lala Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.

Geeta Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P.

Mona Vs State of U.P.