Allowed

Satendra@ Bholai v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2020BAIL/38595/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court allowed the bail application of an accused in a murder and rioting case involving three deaths. Considering the gravity of the offense and that a co-accused was already granted bail, the court held it to be a fit case for bail. The applicant is released on personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties subject to standard conditions.

Satendra@ Bholai Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38595 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Satendra@ Bholai Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Pandey,Raj Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Satendra @ Bholai in connection with Case Crime No.1134 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Sector-39, Nodia, district Gautam Buddh Nagar.

¶8

As per prosecution case, two persons are said to have succumbed to gun shot injuries. Three persons are nominated in the FIR including the applicant. It is urged that the informant was not the eye-witness. The sole eye-witness, who was accompanying the deceased was Karmveer and the eye-witness Karmveer has not supported the prosecution during trial.

¶9

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 the co-accused Harishankar has been admitted to the concession of bail by another Bench of this Court by order dated 13.10.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.32510 of 2020 and the role assigned to the applicant is similar to the role of the other co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail. He claims parity. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 08.03.2019 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea. However, learned A.G.A. does not dispute the factum of parity.

¶11

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 and also the fact that the co-accused Harishankar has been admitted to the concession of bail by this Court, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant Satendra @ Bholai 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:

¶14

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;

¶15

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

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by learned counsel for the applicant along with a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 2.12.2020 R./

Satendra@ Bholai v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satendra@ Bholai 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

Ramlagan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Guddu @ Abhay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Narendra Vs State of U.P.

Ravindra @ Pappu Vs State of U.P.

Aman Vs State of U.P.

Yogendra @ Karu Vs State of U.P.