Allowed

Gaurav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Dec 2023BAIL/50299/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant after finding he was falsely implicated two months post-incident and following orders granting bail to co-accused, finding no risk of tampering or witness intimidation.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding evidence tampering, witness pressurization, and appearance in court.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:237411

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50299 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Gaurav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Balbir Yadav,Deepak Yadav,Vandana Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, Sri N.K. Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and 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. 553 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 and 34 I.P.C., Police Station- Khair, District- Aligarh during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits 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 injured after two months of the alleged incident. It is next contended that the named accused Sohit Chaudhari and identically placed co-accused Babal @ Virendra have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 1.11.2023 and 18.10.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.46067 of 2023 and 41190 of 2023. The applicant claims parity. The applicant does not have any criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 10.9.2023. 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 submissions from the record.

¶10

Having heard 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. The name of the applicant was disclosed by the injured after two months of the alleged incident. The named accused Sohit Chaudhari and identically placed co-accused Babal @ Virendra have been granted bail by this Court. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than three months and 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 intimidate the

¶11

witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant, Gaurav 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 tamper 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 :- 15.12.2023 S.S.

¶18

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

Gaurav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gaurav 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

Sughad Singh Vs State of U.P.

Brijesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raghuveer Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Nitin Vs State of U.P. though it Principal Secretary (Home)Lucknow

Lalit @ Kallu Vs State of U.P.

Sheeba and Another Vs State of U.P.