Allowed

Ravi Sharma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Dec 2022BAIL/59030/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding an arrest under Sections 379, 411 IPC, the court allowed the prayer after finding that the applicant made out a case for bail citing Satendra Kumar Antil, emphasizing the absence of independent witnesses for recovery and the applicant's lack of prior conviction.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail executed on a personal bond and two sureties.

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

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 59030 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ravi Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Ravi Sharma with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.271 of 2022, under Section 379, 411 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Bansi, District Siddharth Nagar.

¶7

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicant is not named in the First Information Report. On 11.09.2022, police party arrested three accused persons with three motorcycles and implicated the applicant in the present case. From the possession of the applicant Rs.120/has been recovered. There is no independent witness of the alleged recovery and the recovery is false and planted. There is no evidence to connect the applicant with the present case. Applicant has no concerned with the incident. There is no independent witness to support the prosecution case. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. The applicant is not a previous convict. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.09.2022 and in case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶9

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 larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in 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.

¶10

Let the applicant, Ravi Sharma, who is involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a

¶11

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.

¶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

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

¶16

Order Date :- 23.12.2022 SKD

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravi Sharma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Sharma 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahboob Alam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Pavnendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lakmuddin Vs State of U.P.

Dharmshekhar Vs State of U.P.

Narayan Vs State of U.P.