Single judge granted bail to the applicant charged with theft and mischief under Section 411, 414 IPC and Section 15 D.A.A. Act, relying on the reformative theory and Article 21, without expressing an opinion on the merits.
Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
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. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6307 of 2021
Applicant :- Bhola @ Ravi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Manish Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA-I, appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is next contended that there is no independent or public witness of the alleged recovery. It is submitted that applicant is nothing to do in the present incident and has been falsely roped by the police only to show his good work. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 30.09.2020.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.
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 the applicant Bhola @ Ravi involved in Case Crime No. 741 of 2020, under Sections 411, 414 I.P.C. and Section 15 of D.A.A. Act, Police Station-Tajganj., District-Agra be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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 :- 7.6.2021 Vikram
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail considering allegations of false implication and lack of independent witnesses.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶8
(2018) 2 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Bhola @ Ravi
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Vivek Kumar Singh
Parties & counsel
