Allowed

Pyare and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Sept 2022BAIL/29410/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal miscellaneous bail application involved Pyare and Suraj, accused under Sections 316, 323, 504 I.P.C., who sought bail citing parity with a co-accound and lack of specific role. The Court, without adjudging merits, observed that a case for bail was made out based on facts and circumstances, allowing the applicants on personal bond and sureties subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to applicants on personal bond and two sureties each, subject to conditions to ensure fair trial and no reoffending.

Pyare and Another Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29410 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Pyare And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Phool Singh Yadav,Ajai Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ajai Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Vishwa Deepak Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicants on bail in Case Crime No.892 of 2021, registered under Sections 316, 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Jalalabad, District Shahjahanpur during pendency of the trial.

¶7

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants claim parity with the co-accused, namely, Rajat, who is the main accused of the case, has been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.31838 of 2022 vide orders dated 14.09.202 and the role of the applicants are identical to the co-accused, hence, the applicants are also entitled for bail on the ground of same footing. No specific role has been assigned to the applicants. Initially NCR was lodged on 19.10.2021 against the applicants for physical assault thereafter the present FIR has been lodged. He next contended that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to prior enmity. The applicants are languishing in jail since 28.03.2022. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate in trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicants.

¶9

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another , S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , the Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicants, namely, Pyare and Suraj, who are involved

¶11

in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on their 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.

¶12

The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶13

The applicants shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 23.9.2022 Nitin Verma

¶17

Digitally signed by NITIN KUMAR VERMA Date: 2022.09.23 18:21:48 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pyare and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pyare and Another 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Upendra Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Nishant Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Kumar Verma Vs State of Uttar Pradesh through Secretary ,Home Govt. of U.P.

Shiva Yadav @ Navneet Vs State of U.P.

Shyam Sundar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Dilshad Vs State of U.P.