Dharmendra Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 79

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19673 of 2023

Applicant :- Dharmendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Faisal Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant in Case Crime No. 244 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 302 IPC, Police Station Jani, District Meerut, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶7

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant accused has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the applicant and other accused persons came on two motorcycle at the door of house of the informant and made firing at brother of the informant Vikendra @ Gori in which he has sustained bullet injuries and died at the spot. It is next submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, but the police has falsely planted a pistol upon the applicant. It is further submitted that motive was assigned to co-accused namely Vishal and Sagar. It is also submitted that co-accused persons namely Vishal and Sagar have already been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court, vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 10284 of 2023 and 29763 of 2022 copies of which are on record. He further submits that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of the coaccused who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. Learned counsel for the applicant lastly submits that the applicant is in jail since 04.09.2021 having no criminal history and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. However, it is not disputed the fact that the similarly placed co-accused has been granted bail by this Court.

¶9

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A. G. A. and the fact that identically

¶10

placed co-accused has already been enlarged on bail, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.

¶11

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Dharmendra in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶13

(1). The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence during the trial.

¶14

(2). The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶15

(3). The applicant will appear before the trial Court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

(4). 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 2.5.2023 v.k.updh.

¶19

Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dharmendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramnaresh Vs State of U.P.

Deendayal Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Smt Rubi Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Amit Kumar Sahu Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.