Sachin Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 71

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4792 of 2020

Applicant :- Sachin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Vishwadeep Patel, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ramesh Chandra Yadava, learned Counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for State and perused the material available on record.

¶7

Accused-applicant, involved in Case Crime No.696 of 2019, under Sections 364, 387, 420, 392, 504, 506 and 411 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Orai, District Jalaun, applied for bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case by the police to show good work. He has committed no offence. Prosecution story is false and fake. Applicant is not named in the FIR. He is not spot arrested. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. There is no independent witness to support the prosecution case. One day delayed FIR has been lodged without any explanation. It is alleged that two persons have been arrested on spot in which accused Karunendra has been granted bail by this Court on 23.01.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3634 of 2020 and the case of applicant is better to that of coaccused Karunendra, therefore, the applicant be released on bail on the ground of parity also. Applicant is in jail since 24.06.2019. In supplementary affidavit, there are two criminal history against the applicant which has been explained. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant'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. Due to heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no

¶9

possibility of early conclusion of the trial.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, rival contention of learned counsel for the parties, detention of applicant in jail, severity of punishment in case of conviction, keeping in view of bail granted to the co-accuse and without commenting upon the merit of the case, applicant deserves bail.

¶12

Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let applicant Sachin 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:-

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 6.2.2020 I.A.Siddiqui

Sachin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prince Chaudhary Vs State of U.P.

Amir and Another Vs State of U.P.

Jaggi @ Kadar Khan Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Kumar Kharvar Vs State of U.P.

Pawan @ Monu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Niranjan Singh Vs State of U.P.