Allowed

Shivlesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Feb 2023BAIL/57884/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a bail application filed by Shivlesh in a criminal trial for offences under Sections 308, 325, 323, 504, and 506 IPC. Relying on parity with a co-accused already granted bail and noting no distinguishable role or criminal history, the Court observed a case made out for bail without expressing an opinion on merits or appealed law.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence, cooperating in trial, and not committing further crimes.

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

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 57884 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shivlesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- B.K. Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. on behalf of State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.0118 of 2020, under Sections 308, 325, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. P.S. Sumerpur, District Hamirpur, during pendency of trial.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. General role has been assigned to all the accused persons for causing injury. He next argued that identically placed co-accused, Manish Kumar has been granted bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.59041 of 2022. He further submits that since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has no criminal history. He is languishing in jail since 22.10.2022. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and the fact that the case of the applicant is similar to that of coaccused, who have been granted bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another , passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant, Shivlesh be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶15

Order Date :- 2.2.2023 Meenu Singh

¶16

Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shivlesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivlesh 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhanu Vs State of U. P. through its Secretary

Mukesh Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Avadhpal @ Avaneesh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Dharmender Alias Phullu Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Vs State of U.P.

Kalu @ Krishna Pal Vs State of U.P.