Allowed

Roopram v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Nov 2019BAIL/47637/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the applicant Roopram sought release on bail in a criminal case involving sections of the IPC and other statutes. Considering rival contentions, police recovery, and punishment severity, the court allowed the bail application.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Roopram was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties with filed undertakings.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47637 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Roopram 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 Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Accused-applicant, involved in Case Crime No.223 of 2017, under Sections 147, 149, 332, 336, 342, 353, 395, 427, 436, 452, 504, 506 IPC and under Section 31(1) Criminal Law Amendement Act and under Section 3/4 Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, Police Station Kampil, District Farrukhabad, applied for bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present; he is not named in the FIR; his name came into light during investigation. It is further contended that applicant is in Jail since 26.08.2019. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant's fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is further contended that co-accused-Sudarshan Singh and three others have already been granted bail vide order dated 01.10.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.41515 of 2019 by this Court and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity.

¶8

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that accused holds a Service Centre from where 10 motorcycles have been recovered for which he has no valid explanation.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, rival contention of learned counsel for the parties, evidence collected by I.O. during investigation, recovery shown by Police, severity of punishment, allegation levelled against the accusedappllicant, applicant deserves bail.

¶10

Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let applicant-Roopram be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties and filing an undertaking to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶13

The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶14

During trial, applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activities or case.

¶15

In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶16

Order Date :- 14.11.2019 Akram

Roopram v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roopram 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

Man Singh Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Soni Vs State of U.P.

Ramu Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Irfan @ Susa Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Alias Lakhram Vs State of U.P.