High Court granted bail to applicants claiming parity of production with a coaccused already released. Bail granted subject to conditions ensuring witness safety and court appearance.
Applicants released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties each with strict conditions regarding absence and witness interference.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5835 of 2022
Applicant :- Gopal Alias Ramgopal And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Azad Khan,Amit Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pratap Kanchan Singh
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
List of fresh cases revised.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State, Sri Pratap Kanchan Singh, learned counsel for the informant and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Gopal Alias Ramgopal and Hardas, with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 119 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 354, 452, 307, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Uldan, District- Jhansi, during pendency of trial.
Learned counsel for the applicants has contended that coaccused, Arvind Kushwaha, has been granted bail by this Court on 20.07.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10536 of 2022. The case of the applicants stand on identical footing, hence the applicants are also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicants are languishing in jail since 30.09.2021. In case they are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicants but does not dispute the claim of parity.
Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicants involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
(i) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court.
In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(iii) The applicants shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against them in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) The applicants 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 absence of the applicants are deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicants and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 20.7.2022 KS
Digitally signed by KISHAN SINHA Date: 2022.07.22 14:09:00 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicants entitled to bail on grounds of parity with coaccused already released on bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & AnotherReferred¶11
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021
Gopal Alias Ramgopal
Hardas
Siddharth
Kishan Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
