Allowed

Sumit Alias Gachhi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Aug 2020BAIL/30186/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicant, Sumit Alias Gachhi, held in judicial custody for nearly 1.5 years. The court considered submissions regarding false recovery and lack of independent witnesses, finding the case fit for bail without adjudicating on merits, subject to standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties; conditions to not tamper with evidence, intimidate witnesses, and appear in court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 42

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30186 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Sumit Alias Gachhi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR. The FIR of the alleged incident was lodged against unknown. During investigation the Investigating Officer recorded statement of one Lokendra who had stated that the applicant came to him and asked to commit theft in the house of informant. On the basis of that statement the police arrested the applicant on 20.3.2019 showing recovery of country made pistol. Thereafter, on the pointing out of applicant recovery of looted S.B.B.L. gun has been shown. False recovery has been planted against the applicant. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. The alleged recovery has been shown after 30 days of the alleged incident which is not probable and believable. It has further been submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 20.3.2019 i.e. near about 1 and 1/2 years. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 3 of the supplementary affidavit filed in support of bail application.

¶7

Per contra; learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

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

¶9

Let the applicant Sumit alias Gachhi involved in Case Crime No. 0029 of 2019, under section 394, 411 IPC, P.S. Vichhawan, District Mainpuri be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶10

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶11

He shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and shall cooperate with the trial.

¶12

He shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 21.8.2020 Masarrat

Sumit Alias Gachhi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumit Alias Gachhi 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

Brijesh Kumar Vs State of Up

Matamber Pandy Vs State of U.P.

Riyasat and Another Vs State of U.P.

Afzaal Vs State of U.P.

Raghvendra Vs State of U.P.

Shubham and 02 Others Vs State of U.P.