Allowed

Ram Sakha Alias Sharma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Dec 2021BAIL/38982/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application for a criminal accused. The applicant, not named in the FIR but implicated via a co-accused's confessional statement, sought release citing lack of flight risk and victim's initial lack of name dropping. The court, without deciding merits, relied on a Supreme Court view to grant bail pending trial subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two local sureties of like amount subject to conditions.

Ram Sakha Alias Sharma Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38982 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Sakha Alias Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramnath Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ramnath, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on 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.152 of 2020, registered under Sections 354-A, 506, 376D I.P.C., Police Station Khiri, District Prayagraj during pendency of the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant is not named in the FIR. The applicant is brother of accused-Uma Shankar on this account the applicant has been implicated in the present case. Victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., has not named the applicant or made allegation. Allegation are against the co-accused Uma Shankar, moreover, eyewitness has also not taken name of the applicant. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. It is next submitted that there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant from the judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is also contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.02.2021.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submits that the applicant's name surfaced in the confessional statement of the victim recorded before CJM under Section 164 Cr.P.C., as such, there is direct evidence against the applicant, hence, applicant is not entitled for bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the statement of the victim under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., medical report regarding age of the victim and evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused and the view laid

¶10

down by the Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant- Ram Sakha @ Sharma, who is involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified :-

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 8.12.2021 Nitin Verma

Ram Sakha Alias Sharma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Sakha Alias Sharma 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

Mohd. Nazim and Another Vs State of U.P.

Shankar Lal and 2 Other Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shiv Narayan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Arjun Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Kishan Vs State of U.P and Another

Kaseem Pasha Vs State of U.P. and Another