Allowed

Deepak Sharma v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Aug 2023BAIL/20896/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal bail application allowed the release of Deepak Sharma, detained for over ten years in a murder trial. The High Court ruled for bail primarily due to the excessive period of incarceration without trial conclusion, explicitly declining to express an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail with a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions of appearance and non-interference.

Deepak Sharma Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:167025

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20896 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Deepak Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Mayank Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Abhishek Mayank, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shatruhan Yadav, learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 390 of 2013, under Sections 302, 452, 393 IPC, Police Station Sasnigate, District Aligarh during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed on 01.05.2014 by this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14496 of 2014 and he is pressing the instant second bail application on the ground that applicant is in jail since 30.07.2013 i.e. for more than ten years and till date trial of the case could not be concluded.

¶9

He further submits that in the charge-sheet there are as many as 16 witnesses and out of them only eight prosecution witnesses could be examined till date, therefore, in early future there is no hope that trial of the case will be concluded. He next submits that applicant is not having any criminal history and bail application of co-accused Mukesh Lawania had already been allowed by this Court on 20.01.2014 and case of applicant was at par with him except the fact that on the pointing out of applicant one knife was recovered.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that it is a case of double murder and first bail application of the applicant has already been dismissed on merit by this Court but could not dispute the fact that name of applicant was disclosed by co-accused Shugur, who was arrested at spot and bail application of co-accused Mukesh Lawania has been allowed

¶11

by this Court on 20.01.2014 and applicant in the present matter is in jail since 30.07.2013 i.e. for more than ten years.

¶12

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶13

Although, this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed by this Court on 01.05.2014 but it appears that applicant in the present matter is in jail since 30.07.2013 i.e. for more than ten years.

¶14

Further, from the record it reflects that in the charge-sheet there are as many as 16 prosecution witnesses and till date only eight prosecution witnesses could be examined and bail application of co-accused Mukesh Lawania had already been allowed by this Court and only distinction with the case of applicant is that on the pointing out of applicant a knife was recovered. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history.

¶15

Therefore, considering the long incarceration of the applicant for more than ten years, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant - Deepak Sharma be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶18

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶19

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶21

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

¶22

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶23

Order Date :- 18.8.2023 AK Pandey

¶24

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deepak Sharma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manish Gaur @ Manni Vs State of U.P.

Subhash Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Vipin Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Vishal Verma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others