Partly allowed

Prabhunath Singh and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2022BAIL/34701/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to Prabhunath Singh on parity grounds and denied bail to Sanjit Singh due to his specific role in causing the injury, relying on Satendra Kumar Antil precedents. Conditions for bail were imposed.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed for Prabhunath Singh subject to personal bond and two sureties with conditions; bail rejected for Sanjit Singh.

Prabhunath Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34701 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Prabhunath Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjeev Kumar Rai

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants Prabhunath Singh & Sanjit Singh with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No.136 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 324, 452, 504, 506, 325, 308 I.P.C., P.S. Bairia, District Ballia during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has argued that in FIR six persons are named for assaulting the informant. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. General role have been assigned to all co-accused persons. Injured has not received any grievous injury. It is next argued by learned counsel for the applicant that co-accused Tej Narayan Singh, Kamlesh Singh @ Kawlesh Singh, Rohit Singh and Vijay Pratap Singh have been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 15.06.2022 & 26.09.2022. Learned counsel for the applicants next submits that the applicants having better case for getting bail on account of parity. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. The applicants are not a previous convict. The applicants are languishing in jail since 12.07.2022 and in case they are enlarged on bail they will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

From perusal of record and injury report of the injured, it is evident that injured has received incised wound 1.5 c.m.x 0.5 x 0.1 c.m. over right side of head. In C.T.Scan report fracture found over right lateral nasal wall, linear displaced fracture found over left lateral nasal wall. Role of causing head injury is assigned to applicant No.2 Sanjit Singh.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have

¶11

opposed the bail prayer of the applicants.

¶12

From the statement of the injured and contents of FIR, role is assigned to applicant No.2 and general role is assigned to applicant no.1. Case of applicant no.1 is similar with coaccused, who has been granted bail.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of the parties and looking to seriousness and gravity of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the submission advanced, I find that no good ground is made out for enlarging the applicant no.2 on bail, hence, the bail application of applicant no.2 Sanjit Singh is accordingly, rejected .

¶14

Keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , the Court is of the view that the applicant no.1 has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant no.1 Prabhunath Singh, who is involved in the aforesaid case crime, 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.

¶16

The applicant no.1 shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶17

The applicant no.1 shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶18

The applicant no.1 shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 9.12.2022 SKD

¶21

Digitally signed by SURJIT KUMAR DEY Date: 2022.12.12 10:28:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Prabhunath Singh and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhunath Singh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Desh Raj Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Soni Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dhanpal Vs State of U.P.

Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.

Bobby Vs State of U.P.

Shobhnath Giri Vs State of U.P.