Allowed

Shailesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Sept 2023BAIL/31131/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Misc. Bail Application was heard in the absence of the applicant. The court found the role assigned to the applicant vague, noted a cross version of facts, no criminal antecedents, and that a co-accused with an identical role was already on bail. Considering the trial delay and lack of state apprehension regarding witness tampering or interference, the applicant was granted bail.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Shailesh is released on bail on a personal bond and two sureties each of like amount, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence and pressuring witnesses.

Shailesh Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:177325

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31131 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Shailesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Vashistha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Lal Sahab Yadav,Shiv Kumar Gupta

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Matter called out in the revised list. None appears on behalf of the applicant to press the instant application. Sri Neeraj Kumar Tripathi, learned AGA is present for the State. Perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 519 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 325, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Soro, District- Kasganj during pendency of the trial.

¶8

It has been asserted in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The first information report assigns a general and vague role to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender, who caused injuries to the injured persons. It has been further asserted in the affidavit that there is a cross version of the incident. Both sides have received injuries. Further, the order-sheet shows that the co-accused Viresh, having identical role, has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 33621 of 2023 vide order dated 17.8.2023. It has been stated in para 26 of the affidavit that the applicant does not have any criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 1.6.2023. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid facts from the record.

¶10

Having heard learned AGA for the State and from perusal of record this Court prima facie finds that a vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. There is cross version of the incident. The applicant does not have any criminal antecedents. Further, the co-accused Viresh, having identical role, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17.8.2023 and the fact that the applicant has remained confined for more than three

¶11

months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant, Shailesh involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

¶13

i. the applicant shall not temper with the prosecution evidence;

¶14

ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness;

¶15

iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 13.9.2023 S.S.

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shailesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailesh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akash Vs State of U.P.

Ramautar Vs State of U.P.

Raghuveer Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Kumar Prajapati Vs State of U.P.

Jhabbu Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Manoj Kumar Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.