The Single Judge of Court No. 88 allowed a bail application filed by Saurabh Singh during trial. The court held that a case for bail was made out given the non-vital nature of the injury and lack of incriminating evidence. Bail was granted on personal bond and sureties.
Applicant released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties in like amount.
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. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42762 of 2021
Applicant :- Saurabh Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Singh Sengar,Vijay Singh Sengar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 127 of 2021, under Section 147, 307, 504, 506, 34 I.P.C. registered at P.S.- Airwakatra, District- Auraiya.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. There is one day's delay in lodging the F.I.R. and no plausible reason has been given for the said delay. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. The recovery of one country made Tamancha and two live cartridges shown against the applicant in the recovery memo, is false, fabricated and planted by the police. There is no independent witness in the present case. The allegations levelled against the applicant are fully false and baseless and case under aforementioned Sections is not made out against him. Further submitted that the injuries suffered by the injured are simple in nature and on nonvital parts of the body. The applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 11.06.2021.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the facts as raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Nature of accusation, evidence collected by I.O. in support of the charge, gravity of offence, nature and severity of punishment in case of conviction, complicity of the accused and all other attending circumstances were duly considered.
Intention to commit murder is gathered from facts and circumstances of each case. Main determinants are nature and
amount of injury, nature of weapon used, vital organ of the body where the injury has been caused and peculiar circumstance of that particular case. So far as the facts of the present case are concerned, there is injury on the palm of the injured, which cannot be said to be vital part of the body.
In view of the above, a case for bail is made out.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .
Let the applicant Saurabh Singh involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions;
In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 6.12.2021 VPS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant in a trial case involving offense under Sections 147, 307, 504, 506 and 34 I.P.C.
6 provisions across 2 enactments
Saurabh Singh
Anil Kumar Ojha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
