Allowed

Ranjhal Saxena v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Feb 2022BAIL/4039/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application sought release on bail for an accused charged under Section 307/34 I.P.C. The court considered the applicant's lack of prior record, the general nature of allegations, and the pandemic's impact on jail overcrowding. It held that the case was fit for bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions against tampering, unlawful activities, and misusing liberty.

Ranjhal Saxena Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4039 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ranjhal Saxena Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gopeshwar Sahai Bisaria Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 435 of 2021 under Section 307/34 I.P.C. Police Station Kotwali District Bareilly.

¶7

Contention is that the applicant has no criminal history and apart from his implication in the present matter, he has also been implicated in a case under Section 4/25 of the Arms Act in the same transaction. It is stated that the role of firing has not been specified to any person and allegation is otherwise general in nature. It is also urged that the injury is simple in nature and cannot be said to have been caused by any fire arm. The applicant, except in these two cases, has no criminal history. It is further argued that the trial is not likely to be concluded shortly on account of Covid-19 pandemic and that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the conduct of trial. Applicant is languishing in jail since 4.11.2021.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposes the bail application.

¶9

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail application on behalf of accused person.

¶10

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record, severity of punishment, totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without expressing any view on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant Ranjhal Saxena be released on bail in the

¶12

aforesaid case crime on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence.

¶14

(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶15

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶16

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶18

Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶19

Order Date :- 14.2.2022

¶20

n.u.

¶21

Digitally signed by NASEEM UDDIN Date: 2022.02.16 14:20:24 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ranjhal Saxena v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjhal Saxena 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

Sharik Vs State of U.P.

Durveen Vs State of U.P.

Gyan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Aafir @ Sawej @ Sajeb Vs State of U.P.

Sikandar Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Yadav Vs State of U.P.