Allowed

Anil Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2023BAIL/3437/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed the bail application of Anil Yadav in a Section 308 IPC case. The court noted arguments regarding self-defence, lack of principal offender status, and no flight risk without affecting merits, ordering release on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court below with specific bail conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3437 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Anil Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of the the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.17 of 2022 at Police Station-Bhadohi, District-Bhadohi under Sections 308, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. The applicant is in jail since 09.01.2023.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 12.01.2023.

¶7

The following arguments made by Shri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶8

(1). This is a cross case.

¶9

(2). The applicant's side was attacked by the informant and his parties. The police authorities declined to register F.I.R. lodged by the applicant under the influence of the informant's side. However, NCR was got registered.

¶10

(3). A number of persons from the applicant's side have sustained injuries including head injuries.

¶11

(4). The F.I.R. assigns a vague and general role to the applicant in the assault.

¶12

(5). The applicant has not been identified as the principal offender who inflicted grievous injuries to the injured.

¶13

(6). The applicant did not exceed his right to self defence.

¶14

(7). The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶15

(8). The applicant is not flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶16

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶17

Let the applicant- Anil Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶18

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or

¶19

influence any witness during the trial.

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 20.2.2023 Dhananjai

¶22

Digitally signed by :- DHANANJAI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anil Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Yadav 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

Aryan Bhargav @ Kamlesh Vs State of U.P.

Faiz Vs State of U.P.

Akash Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Aman Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Aabid Khan @ Munna Vs State of U.P.