Allowed

Vicky v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2022BAIL/45137/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed bail to Vicky, an applicant accused of multiple offences under the PNDT Act and IPC, by furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties. The Court distinguished a prior Supreme Court precedent to support the grant of bail without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45137 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vicky Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mayank Yadav,Vivek Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

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

¶6

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has not committed the present offence. He has no concern with the present matter. Alleged offences are not made out against the applicant. There is no independent witness of the alleged incident. Applicant has been languishing in jail since 7.9.2022 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶7

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

It appears from the perusal of record that the accused is said to be only an agent and he is not a doctor. It has been submitted that in the present case, there is provision to file a complaint case and F.I.R. should not be lodged in such cases. The applicant is said to be in jail since 7.9.2022 having no criminal antecedents. Grounds taken in the bail application are sufficient. Hence, keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant Vicky involved in Case Crime No.304 of 2022 under Sections 3/4/5/6/18/23/29 Preconception and Prenatal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 and Section 3B/9/10 Preconception and Prenatal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Rule and Section 120-B, 34 IPC, Police Station Dhanaura, District - Amroha be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before

¶10

issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶12

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶13

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

¶14

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶15

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

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

¶17

Submission and observation recorded in the matter are only for the purpose of deciding the bail application. Trial court shall not be influenced in any way with the said observation / submission while deciding the trial.

¶18

Order Date :- 2.12.2022 ss

¶19

Digitally signed by SANDEEP SHARMA Date: 2022.12.05 17:43:12 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vicky v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vicky 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

Jan Mohammad Vs State

Raghubir Singh Vs State

New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs Sri Ram Krishna and Others

Shakib @ Kasib Khan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shyamraj Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Rajkumari @ Jhabara Wali @ Atar Kunwar Vs State of U.P.