Allowed

Hariom @ Deepu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Nov 2022BAIL/29916/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application filed under Criminal Misc. B.A. No. 29916 of 2022, the High Court allowed the release of Hariom @ Deepu in a robbery case, noting the lack of independent witnesses for recovery and granting bail subject to conditions including a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail in Case Crime No. 136 of 2021 on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in like amount, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, and mak

Hariom @ Deepu Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29916 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Hariom @ Deepu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilendra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Second Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Akhilendra Yadav, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ghanshyam Mishra, the learned State Counsel and perused the record.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 136 of 2021, under Sections 394, 411 IPC, Police Station Sirsaganj, District Firozabad, during pendency of the trial in the Court below.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of F.I.R lodged on 17.03.2021 alleging robbery of a mobile phone and a wallet containing Rs. 3000/- and A.T.M card.

¶9

In paragraph-5 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant was arrested on 09.04.2021 in case crime no. 134 of 2021 under Sections 394, 435 I.P.C and while he was in judicial custody in connection with the aforesaid case the police has shown recovery of mobile phone on pointing out of the applicant on 11.05.2021.

¶10

The applicant's criminal history has been explained in paragraph-12 of the affidavit filed in support of the affidavit and paragraph-4 of the second supplementary affidavit filed on his behalf as per which he was involved in 14 other cases and the applicant has been granted bail in all the aforesaid cases.

¶11

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he has no criminal history.

¶12

The applicant is languishing in jail since 09.04.2021.

¶13

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has

¶14

opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

¶15

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the incident took place on 17.03.2021; that the applicant was taken into custody in connection with another case on 09.04.2021 and the mobile phone is alleged to have been recovered on his pointing out on 11.05.2021 and also keeping in view that there are no independent witnesses of the alleged recovery, I am of view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

In light of the preceding discussion and without making any observation on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶17

Let the applicant Hariom @ Deepu be released on bail in Case Crime No. 136 of 2021, under Sections 394, 411 IPC, Police Station Sirsaganj, District Firozabad on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to the following conditions:-

¶18

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶19

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶20

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

¶21

(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.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.

¶23

Order Date :- 15.11.2022 PS

¶24

Digitally signed by POOJA SHARMA Date: 2022.11.19 17:45:32 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hariom @ Deepu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hariom @ Deepu 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Panku @ Upendra Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.

Satendra Vs State of U.P.

Jai Prakash Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Daulat Singh Jadon Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow

Rajendra Patel Vs State of U.P.

Kuwarpal Vs State of U.P.