Allowed

Indrasen and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Jan 2023BAIL/59103/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application filed by Indrasen and another under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case for offences under Sections 308, 323, and 504 IPC. The court granted bail on personal bond and two sureties each, subject to conditions regarding appearance and non-tampering.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to conditions of appearance and non-tampering.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 59103 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Indrasen And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Virendra Singh Parmar,Sudhir Kumar Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vikas Sahai, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶6

The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicants on bail in Case Crime No. 216 of 2020, under Sections 308, 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Indargarh, District Kannauj during the pendency of the trial.

¶7

It is contended that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the instant case. As per the allegations in the first information report, general and vague role has been assigned to the applicants. In the statement of the injured specific role of causing injury has been assigned to co-accused Jai Prakash. It is next contended that co-accused Sanoj, having identical role, has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 43314 of 2022, Sanoj v. State of U.P., vide order dated 14.10.2022. The applicants claim parity. The applicants are in jail since 11.11.2022 having no criminal history and if they are released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶9

Having regard to the submissions made but without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Let the applicants- Indrasen and Anuj, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that they:

¶11

shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶12

shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

¶13

shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶14

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶15

Order Date :- 28.1.2023 SKT/-

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Indrasen and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indrasen and Another 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

Hasnain Vs State of U.P.

Arun Pal Vs State of U.P.

Javed Kuraishi Vs State of U.P.

Bhagwan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Yadav @ Sonu Vs State of U.P.