The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal trial involving offences under Sections 354-B, 323 IPC, and 7/8 POCSO Act, accepting that there was no reasonable apprehension of witness tampering or trial delay.
Released on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding appearance and non-tampering with witnesses.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:231979
Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50874 of 2023
Applicant :- Munnilal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Janardhan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
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 the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;
(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
Order Date :- 7.12.2023 Lbm/-
Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. given the lack of reasonable apprehension of tampering with evidence or intimidating witnesses.
Whether the independent eye witnesses' statements and absence of injury support the grant of bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Munnilal
State Of U.P.
Vivek Varma
Lal Bahadur Madhukar Maurya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
