Allowed

Jangbahadur v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Dec 2022BAIL/46673/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving assault and looting involving IPC sections 323, 308, 427, 504, and 506. The court noted parity with a coordinate bench's order and relied on the larger mandate of Article 21. Bail was granted with specific conditions regarding attendance and non-tampering. A copy of a coordinate bench's order granting bail to a co-accused was

What did the court decide?

Respondent released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of appearance and non-tampering.

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

¶1

Court No. - 93 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46673 of 2022 Applicant :- Jangbahadur Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.

¶3

Counter afÏdavit filed on behalf of the State and rejoinder afÏdavit filed on behalf of the applicant in the Court today is taken on record.

¶4

Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Raj Kumar Nishad, learned brief holder for the State and perused the material on record.

¶5

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Jangbahadur , with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 94 of 2018, registered under Sections 323, 308, 427, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police StationBardah, District- Azamgarh, during pendency of trial.

¶6

As per prosecution version, on 26.05.2018 at 09.30 p.m., the applicant along with three other co-accused attacked informant with lathi and butt of country-made pistol causing fracture in his temporal parietal bone of skull and looted Rs.23,000/- from his shirt's pocket, golden chain of 20 gm and a mobile phone BV Plus worth Rs.22,000/-.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. It is next submitted that only one fracture was found on the temporal parietal bone of the skull of the informant. It is not known who was author of the injury. It is further submitted that identically circumstanced coaccused, Ramasre alias Ramashrey, has been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.07.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 25566 of 2022. Copy of the aforesaid order has been annexed as Annexure No. 11 to the afÏdavit filed in support of the bail application. The case of the applicant stands on identical footing and the applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 03.10.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. However, he could not deny the submissions made on behalf of the applicant.

¶9

Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the fact that identically circumstanced co-accused, Ramasre alias Ramashrey, has been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court, the injuries received by the informant, larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, the Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶10

The bail application, accordingly, stands allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant, Jangbahadur , involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶16

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 14.12.2022/KS

¶20

Digitally signed by KISHAN SINHA Date: 2022.12.14 18:07:42 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jangbahadur v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jangbahadur 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

Pramendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Rambhan Singh @ Nanhe Vs State of U.P.

Digamber Singh and Others Vs State of U.P.

Vinesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Pappu Vs State of U.P.

Hari Ram Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others