This bail applicant, detained since November 2021 in an IPC case, sought release. The Court found merit in submissions that the applicant was falsely implicated as a principal offender and allowed bail on personal bond with two sureties.
The applicant to be released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each.
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. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12324 of 2022
Applicant :- Golu Varma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 103 of 2021 at Police Station Vindhyachal, District Mirzapur, under Sections 386, 504 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 18.11.2021.
The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Mirzapur, on 04.02.2022.
Shri Shyam Singh, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per prosecution case set out in the FIR the applicant has not been identified as the principal offender who had brandished the weapon before the informant and threatened him. The applicant was only a bystander. Learned counsel for the applicant has explained the criminal history of the applicant and contends that the same has no bearing on the instant case. Lastly it is contended by the learned counsel for applicant that the applicant shall not abscond and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.
Shri Sunil Kumar Srivastava, learned AGA for the
State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.
I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Golu Varma be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.
(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above condition, the
prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 5.4.2022 Pravin
Digitally signed by PRAVIN VERMA Date: 2022.04.06 12:44:41 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail in a case under Sections 386, 504 IPC.
Whether the applicant, who claims to be a bystander, has falsely implicated.
Golu Varma
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
