Allowed¶8

Deepanshu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2022BAIL/18753/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail — ground of parity with co-accused — Sections 397, 412, 34 IPC — Case Crime No. 41 of 2022, P.S. Kotwali, District Moradabad — applicant Deepanshu in jail since 5.3.2022 — co-accuseds Prince and Atul Sharma already granted bail (Bail Applications Nos. 17036 and 18600 of 2022) — Dataram Singh v. State of U.P., (2018) 3 SCC 22 relied upon — Article 21 of the Constitution — Allahabad High Court — Siddharth, J. — bail application allowed with conditions; complainant free to seek cancellation on breach.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to applicant Deepanshu on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to enumerated conditions; sureties to be verified before the release order is issued. ¶8

Deepanshu Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶8

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Deepanshu, accused in Case Crime No. 41 of 2022 under Sections 397, 412, 34 IPC, is entitled to bail on the ground of parity with co-accuseds Prince and Atul Sharma, who have already been enlarged on bail.

¶6

Court's answer

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of learned counsel, the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution and the dictum of the Apex Court in Dataram Singh v. State of U.P., and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court held that the applicant has made out a case for bail and allowed the bail application.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

The applicant Deepanshu was directed to 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 conditions (no tampering with evidence, no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses, appearance before the trial court on dates fixed, no similar offence, no inducement/threat/promise to persons acquainted with the facts), with sureties to be verified before issuance of the release order; on breach of any condition the complainant may move for cancellation of bail.

¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Siddharth, J.) allowed Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 18753 of 2022 filed by Deepanshu, accused in Case Crime No. 41 of 2022 under Sections 397, 412, 34 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Moradabad. Bail was granted on the ground of parity, the co-accuseds Prince and Atul Sharma having already been enlarged on bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 17036 and 18600 of 2022 on 26.5.2022 and 20.5.2022. Placing reliance on the dictum of the Apex Court in Dataram Singh v. State of U.P., (2018) 3 SCC 22, and the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution, and expressly without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court directed release on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence, pressurising or intimidating prosecution witnesses, absence from trial dates, commission of similar offences, and inducement, threat or promise to dissuade disclosure of facts; sureties to be verified before the release order. On breach of any condition, the complainant is free to move for cancellation of bail. The applicant had been in jail since 5.3.2022.

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18753 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Deepanshu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶6

The submission is that co-accuseds, Prince and Atul Sharma, have already been enlarged on bail vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 17036 and 18600 of 2022 on 26.5.2022 and 20.5.2022 and the case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is in jail since 5.3.2022.

¶7

On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant, Deepanshu, involved in Case Crime No. 41 of 2022, under Section 397,412,34 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali District- Moradabad, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶10

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶11

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶12

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶13

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected of the commission of which they are suspected.

¶14

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶16

Order Date :- 5.7.2022 Atul kr. sri.

¶17

Digitally signed by ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.07.06 11:08:13 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deepanshu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepanshu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manish Sharma . T.G.2 Vs State of U.P.

Pawan @ Pankaj Vs State of U.P.

Prem Singh Vs State of U.P.

Gyasuddin Vs State of U.P.

Sheelendra Vs State of U.P.

Hafiz Ali Vs State of U.P.