Allowed

Ravindra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2019BAIL/29921/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 29921 of 2019 was allowed. The applicant, Ravindra, charged under sections 411, 413 I.P.C., sought bail alleging false implication and fake recovery. The court, considering the nature of allegations and circumstances, found it a fit case for bail without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties in the like amount.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29921 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ravindra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mujib Ahmad Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Ravindra in connection with Case Crime No.204 of 2017, under Sections 41/102 Cr.P.C. and 411, 413 I.P.C., P.S. Bannadevi, District Aligarh.

¶7

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that the alleged recovery shown from the applicant is totally fake and false. He submitted that there is no public witness of the alleged recovery. He further submitted that no identification parade was conducted by the police to ascertain the real culprits. He submitted that all the offences are triable by the court of Magistrate. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 19.03.2017 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea.

¶9

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶10

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Ravindra involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶12

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶13

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;

¶14

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶15

iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;

¶16

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

Order Date :- 1.8.2019

¶18

R./

Ravindra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra 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

Anil Verma Vs State of U.P.

Jaiveer Singh Vs State of U.P.

Satish Vs State of U.P.

Pooran Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Shukla Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Sisodiya Vs State of U.P.