In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 21340 of 2021, the Court granted bail to Sarvesh Kumar Nishad charged under Sections 379, 411, 419, and 420 IPC, citing parity with a co-accused's bail and considerations under Article 21.
Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties on standard conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21340 of 2021
Applicant :- Sarvesh Kumar Nishad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Sadab Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA, appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the coaccused Awadh Bihari Nishad @ Arvind Master having similar role has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 23.03.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14414 of 2021, a copy of said order has been annexed as Annexure No. 5 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is in jail since 15.01.2021.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.
Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.
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.
Let applicant- Sarvesh Kumar Nishad , be released on bail in Case Crime No. 15 of 2021, under Sections- 379, 411, 419, 420 IPC, Police StationKotwali Kalpi, District- Jalaun, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
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.
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.
In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
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.
Order Date :- 7.9.2021 Arti
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail on the ground of parity and larger mandate of Article 21.
Whether the nature of accusation and severity of punishment permits bail.
Whether overcrowding of jails during pandemic is a factor in granting bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and anotherExplained¶9
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sarvesh Kumar Nishad
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
