Allowed

Deependra Singh Yadav Alias Munna Alias Dheerendra v. State of U.P.and 3 Others

Allahabad HC16 May 2023BAIL/12365/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal miscellaneous bail application filed by Deependra Singh Yadav challenging his detention. The court considered arguments regarding false implication and FIR delay but ultimately granted bail based on the nature of offence and evidence without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions.

Deependra Singh Yadav Alias Munna Alias Dheerendra Vs… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:116137

¶2

Court No. - 86

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12365 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Deependra Singh Yadav Alias Munna Alias Dheerendra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Khare Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Yogesh Narayan Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and Shri Mithilesh Kumar, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the alleged incident was said to be occurred on 26.12.2022 and the F.I.R. of the incident was lodged on 28.12.2022 and there is no plausible explanation of the delay in lodging the F.I.R. It is next contended that a concocted and false story has been set up by the prosecution whereas the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that F.I.R. was lodged against three family members of applicant including the applicant. It is further submitted that injuries caused to the injured persons are simple in nature. It is further submitted that both the parties were fighting in the night over the irrigation of the field and who was the aggressor is not known. It is further submitted that there is contradiction in the statement of victim and informant in the statement recorded under section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that there is criminal history of the applicant and the same has been explained in para no. 13 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It is further submitted that ingredients of offences are absent and entire prosecution story is based on false and frivolous allegations. It is further submitted that trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It

¶8

has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 11.01.2023.

¶9

Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and have submits that prima facie offence against the accused applicant is made out and in case applicant is release on bail, he will misuse the liberty of bail, but, he could not disputed the aforesaid facts.

¶10

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, looking to the uncertainty in conclusion of trial, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in 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.

¶11

Let the applicant Deependra Singh Yadav Alias Munna Alias Dheerendra involved in Case Crime No. 394 of 2022, under Sections 354, 452, 352, 323, 504, 506, 427, 457 I.P.C. and section 10 POCSO Act, Police Station Kurara , District Hamirpur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.

¶12

(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

(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.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 16.5.2023

¶18

Bhanu

¶19

Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deependra Singh Yadav Alias Munna Alias Dheerendra v. State of U.P.and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deependra Singh Yadav Alias Munna Alias Dheerendra v. State of U.P.and 3 Others

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

Sunil Kumar Mittal Vs State of U.P.

Anil Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vijay Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P.

Udham Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Ramesh Vs State of U.P.

Julfikar Alias Suhail Gunde Vs State of U.P.