Allowed

Sarvesh Alias Lala S/O Madhav v. State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home

Allahabad HC30 May 2022/4496/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was allowed by the Allahabad High Court. The applicant, accused of murder under Sections 302/34 IPC, was held to be a fit case for bail as the prosecution story lacked witnesses and was based on conjectures, especially given bail had been granted to the co-accused. The applicant was released on personal bond and two sureties subject to standard condi

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount, subject to various conditions regarding attendance and conduct.

Sarvesh Alias Lala S/O Madhav Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4496 of 2022

¶2

Applicant :- Sarvesh Alias Lala S/O Madhav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Counsel for Applicant :- Prem Shanker Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶5

The present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant (Sarvesh @ Lala), who is languishing in jail since 11.12.2021 in Case Crime No.0571 of 2021, under Sections 302/34 IPC, Police Station-Maholi, District-Sitapur.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.).

¶7

Allegation against the accused-applicant is of killing the father his master Randheer Singh Yadav with the collusion of coaccused, Randheer Singh Yadav. Though the FIR was registered against one Gulfaan Yadav, but during the course of investigation name of the accused-applicant came into light for commission of the offence. The accused-applicant and his master Randheer Singh Yadav allegedly had killed the deceased. The role of firing has been attributed to the coaccused, Randheer Singh Yadav, main accused, who has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 18.05.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3466 of 2022. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the case of the present applicant is on better footing than the case of the coaccused, Randheer Singh Yadav, therefore on the basis of principles of parity, the present applicant may also be released on bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the prosecution story is not credible inasmuch as there was no witness, who had seen the occurrence. Prosecution story is based on surmises and conjectures and the evidence which has been brought on record would not lead conviction of the accused-applicant.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has undertaken on behalf of

¶10

the present applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings.

¶11

On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has, however, opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that since the role of the present applicant was found in the commission of crime, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Without entering into merits of the issue and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the material available on record also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and the fact that the co-accused, Randheer Singh Yadav who has been attributed the role of firing, has been granted bail, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶13

Let applicant-Sarvesh @ Lala, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶15

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the

¶18

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.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

¶20

Order Date :- 30.5.2022 [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Suresh/

¶21

Digitally signed by SURESH CHANDRA Date: 2022.05.30 18:35:52 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sarvesh Alias Lala S/O Madhav v. State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarvesh Alias Lala S/O Madhav v. State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home

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

Suraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Mohd. Sahil S/O Nisar Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Ravi Pratap S/O Raj Kumar (Short Term Bail) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Humair Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Shiv Prakash Alias Gadde Vs State of Up Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Shiv Bahadur Fourth Bail Vs State of U.P.