Allowed

Gajendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Aug 2020BAIL/22505/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application by Gajendra opposing the State of U.P. The court granted bail citing parity with co-accused already released and lack of specific role. The applicant was acquitted of no charges meritually considered as bail was granted based on procedural grounds.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Gajendra granted bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Gajendra Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22505 of 2020 Applicant :- Gajendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhanu Prakash Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the applicant through the video conferencing, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶4

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the FIR of the alleged incident has been lodged against twelve persons including the applicant making general allegation. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. There is cross version of the alleged incident, four persons have also sustained injury from the side of the applicant. The FIR had also been lodged from the side of the applicant. It has further been submitted that co-accused Harendra and Kushalpal @ Bholu having identical role have already been released on bail by another bench of this Court vide orders dated 26.2.2020 and 26.5.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Applications No. 6431 of 2020 and 12837 of 2020 respectively, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. There is no criminal history of the applicant and is in jail since 25.6.2020.

¶5

Per contra, learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that co-accused Harendra and Kushalpal @ Bholu having identical role have already been released on bail.

¶6

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶7

Let the applicant Gajendra involved in Case Crime No. 743 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 506, 307, 452, 323 IPC, P.S. Kosi Kalan, District Mathura be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶8

The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.

¶9

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and cooperate with the trial.

¶10

The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.

¶11

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

¶12

Order Date :- 20.8.2020/A.

Gajendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gajendra 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

Ankit Vs State of U.P.

Maruf Vs State of U.P.

Sarvesh Dixit Vs State of U.P.

Prabhash Vs State of U.P.

Shafik Vs State of U.P.

Kapil Yadav Vs State of U.P.