Narendra Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 76

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9898 of 2020

Applicant :- Narendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Prakash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Upendra Upadhyay

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Hari Prakash Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Upendra Upadhyay, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I, appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that co-accused namely Poonam @ Jitemdra and Guddan alias Anil have been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.2.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6435 of 2020, a copy of the said order has been annexed as annexure-12 to the affidavit accompanying this bail application and the case of the applicant stands on much better footings. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 4.11.2019. It has been pointed out that the applicant has criminal history of one case i.e. Case Crime No.209 of 2017, under Sections 376-D, 452 I.P.C., in which final report has been submitted by the police, reference in this regard is made to paragraph no.3 of the rejoinder affidavit dated 11.5.2020, which is taken on record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the complainant that the Investigating Officer concerned has not properly investigated the case of the applicant and has not submitted that charge sheet against the applicant under the relevant sections inspite of the fact that the applicant has also the similar role as of the co-accused persons.

¶8

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶9

Let applicant- Narendra , be released on bail in Case Crime No.246 of 2019, under Sections- 452, 307 I.P.C., Police Station- Jaithra, District- Etah, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶10

The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶11

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶12

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶13

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

¶14

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶15

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad. The concerned Court shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad.

¶16

Order Date :- 7.9.2020 Dev/-

Narendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra 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

Arjun Ram Vs State of U.P.

Mantosh Paswan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ankit Vs State of U.P.

Mohit Vs State of U.P.

Dharamvir Vs State of U.P.

Bablesh Vs State of U.P.