Allowed

Harendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2022BAIL/36064/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application filed by Harendra in a criminal case involving grievous hurt and arms offences. The court found that the applicant made out a case for bail considering the cross-version FIR and contradictory statements, holding a cross version of parties and contradictory statements.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in a like amount to the satisfaction of the court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36064 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Harendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arun K. Singh Deshwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Apul Misra

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit has been filed today in the Court, is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Arun K. Singh Deshwal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Apul Mishra, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 62 of 2022, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 354, 427, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/25/27 of Arms Act, Police Station Kanth, District Moradabad during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is a cross version FIR. Both the parties have lodged FIR to each other as both the parties have received grievous injuries. At this stage, it cannot be ascertained that who is aggressor. Statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 are contradictory to each other. Applicant has no previous criminal history. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.03.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate in trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. as well as informant's counsel have vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submitted that it is a counter blast case but applicant was aggressor and informant was defender, which is clear from FIR. From informant side, Smt. Rakesh Devi has received injuries but applicant has not made accused in his FIR.

¶10

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

¶11

Vs. C.B.I. & Another , S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant, Harendra, 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.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 6.12.2022

¶18

Nitin Verma

¶19

Digitally signed by NITIN KUMAR VERMA Date: 2022.12.06 17:20:12 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Harendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harendra 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

Laxman Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Zeeshan Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Pradeep Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Somil Vs State of U.P.

Kandha Singh Alias Ajay Singh Vs State of U.P.

Shakeel Khan Vs State of U.P.