Allowed

Sonu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Nov 2023BAIL/45520/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was disposed of allowing the release of the applicant, Sonu. The Court observed the applicant was not named in the F.I.R., had no criminal history, and a co-accused in identical position was granted bail, holding he is entitled to bail.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Sonu be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each on the conditions specified.

Sonu Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:222054

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45520 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sonu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Lavkush Kumar Shukla,Ayub Khan,Sanjay Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State.

¶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. 271 of 2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 I.P.C. and Section 66D of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, Police Station- Govind Nagar, DistrictMathura during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The name of the applicant was disclosed by the co-accused, Ejaj Ahmad in Police custody. The said statement, insofar as, it implicates the applicant is unreliable. The recovered items cannot be connected to the offence. It is next contended that the identically placed coaccused, Satya Prakash, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 30.10.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 45541 of 2023. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 15.08.2023, having no criminal history. 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 counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. Name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Ejaj Ahmad in police custody. Identically placed co-accused, Satya Prakash, has been granted bail by this Court. Further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more than three 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

¶11

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, Sonu 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; and,

¶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 :- 23.11.2023 Sachin Mishra

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sonu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu 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

Gulfam Vs State of U.P.

Dilnawaj @ Kallu Vs State of U.P.

Shahrukh Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Manish Gupta Alias Mintu Lal Vs State of U.P.

Bhupendra @ Bhuppu Vs State of U.P.