Allowed

Manoj @ Golu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Oct 2020BAIL/33828/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding offenses under IPC 395, 412 and Dacoity Affected Area Act, 1983, the High Court allowed the bail application. Relying on the parity principle where a co-accoushad already been released on bail, the Court granted release contingent upon furnishing a bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding court functioning.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33828 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Manoj @ Golu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to correct the type copy of the First Information Report within the course of the day.

¶6

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

¶7

The co-accused, Ashok Yadav Pradhan, has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 22.09.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.22670 of 2020. The prayer for release of the applicant on bail on the ground of parity has been made. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.01. 2020.

¶8

Considering the fact that the identically placed coaccused has already been released on bail by this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that it is a fit case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant, Manoj @ Golu, involved in case crime No. 217 of 2019, under sections 395, 412 I.P.C, and section 12 Dacoity Affected Area Act, 1983 Police Station Kurrah, District Mainpuri 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 that :-

¶10

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶11

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶12

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶13

In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his bail shall be effective after the period of short term bail comes to an end.

¶14

The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored. In case court below is functioning normally, this condition will not apply and applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of bail bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court below.

¶15

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶16

7.The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

Order Date :- 14.10.2020 Atul kr. sri.

Manoj @ Golu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj @ Golu 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

Naseem Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Atul Pathak Vs State of U.P.

Dr. Tazeen Fatima Vs State of U.P.

Ranju Kumari Vs State of U.P.

Israr Khan Vs State of U.P.

Kartar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.