Allowed

Deepak Madheshiya v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Dec 2021BAIL/44634/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The applicant sought release from custody in a criminal case. The court considered the unexplained FIR delay and injury severity before granting bail on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Deepak Madheshiya to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with conditions.

Deepak Madheshiya Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 88

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44634 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Deepak Madheshiya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Pandey,Vibhav Prakash Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.

¶5

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

¶6

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. 279 of 2020, under Section 323, 342, 504, 506, 427 & 307 I.P.C. registered at P.S.- Vishunpura, District- Kushinagar.

¶7

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. The injuries suffered by the injured as per opinion of doctor are simple in nature. There is six days unexplained delay in lodgement of the F.I.R. whereas it is mentioned in the F.I.R. that police was immediately informed by dialing 112 number. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. 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. The applicant is languishing in jail since 01.08.2021.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

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.

¶10

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that there is six days unexplained delay in lodging the F.I.R. and injuries suffered by injured are simple in nature, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, a case for bail is made out.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶12

Let the applicant Deepak Madheshiya 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;

¶13

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶15

During trial, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities.

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 17.12.2021 VPS

Deepak Madheshiya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Madheshiya 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivam Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Nadeem and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Vakeel Vs State of U.P.

Sadab Vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Vs State of U.P.

Naveen Kumar @ Ustra Vs State of U.P.