Dori Lal v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
The court rejected a second bail application filed by Dori Lal. The applicant sought bail on grounds of parity with a co-accused, Premsheela, who had been granted bail. The court found the roles and circumstances differed significantly regarding the amount of wrongful loss, rejecting the parity claim and declining the bail prayer.
What did the court decide?
Bail application rejected; applicant not enlarged on bail.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3935 of 2021
Applicant :- Dori Lal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Saurabh Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard Sri Pramod Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Sri Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and perused the material placed on the record.
Applicant- Dori Lal seeks bail in Case Crime No. 406 of 2018, under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station- Baheri, DistrictBareilly.
This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first bail was rejected by this Court vide order dated 16.07.2019. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that co-accused Premsheela who has been admitted on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.10.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 22598 of 2019 also bears the similar role and her bail order appearing at page no.26 has been annexed as Annexure no.2 to the second bail application. Thus the applicant, who is languishing in jail since 04.01.2019, is also entitled to be enlarged on bail during trail on the ground of parity.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the fresh grounds as urged by learned counsel for the applicant in the second bail application by submitting that so far as the case of Premsheela is concerned, that stands on different footing and cannot be said to be identical with that of the applicant which is very much reflected from the bare perusal of the description contained in the first information report as well as in the suicidal note which has been brought before this Court at page no.37 (Annexure no.4).
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail on the ground of parity with a co-accused who was granted bail.
Whether fresh grounds exist to reconsider the bail application after the first was rejected on merits.
Whether the accused can claim identical role to a co-accused given differing allegations of wrongful loss amounts.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Dori Lal
Coram
Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/3935/2021
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court