Allowed

Devendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Sept 2021BAIL/12198/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought bail in a trial for attempted murder under Section 307 IPC. The court observed that no injuries were sustained, noting the lack of injury as a significant factor. Balancing the severity of the charge against the prima facie evidence and citing the reformative theory of punishment under Article 21, the court allowed bail.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding attendance, non-tampering with witnesses, and no illegal activities.

Devendra Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12198 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Devendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kapil Tyagi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Kapil Tyagi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 482 of 2020, under Sections- 307 IPC, Police StationDadri, District- Gautam Budh Nagar, during pendency of trial.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case by the police. It is next contended that as per the FIR, the applicant fired upon the police party and attempted to murder. It is next contended that nobody got injured by the alleged firing. It is no injury case. The applicant is in jail since 23.7.2020 having criminal history of 10 cases which has been explained in paragraph no. 10 to the application and in paragraph no. 8 to the rejoinder affidavit out of which in six cases, applicant is released on bail by the competent authority and rest three cases, he was implicated in the present case including Gangster Act and if he is released on bail, there is no chance of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail or tampering with the prosecution witnesses.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

¶9

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. The application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant, Devendra who is involved in aforesaid crime 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

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

¶12

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶13

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

¶14

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 21.9.2021 Akbar

Devendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devendra 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Annu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharmendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Amir Vs State of U.P.

Sadiq Vs State of U.P.

Om Prakash @ Oma Pandit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Om Prakash @ Oma Pandit Vs State of U.P. and Another