Allowed

Amit Solanki v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Apr 2023BAIL/7557/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a case involving armed robbery and attempted murder. The judge held that since the injury sustained was on a non-vital part and not life-threatening, the legal requirements for bail were met.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties, one being a family member, subject to conditions to prevent tampering with witnesses and ensure appearance in court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7557 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Amit Solanki Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Shukla,Praveen Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bhanu Prakash Verma

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.243 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Surir, District Mathura.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to F.I.R. version on 21.10.2022 some hot talk took place between applicant and nephew of the informant, on 22.10.2022 at about 7:00 a.m. applicant and four other persons came at the shop of informant lashed with pistol and lathi danda, applicant fired due to which son of informant Santosh Singh received gun shot injury in his hand. He further submits that in the present case there is x-ray report of the injured shows that no boney injury found and the said injury is on the non-vital part and it is not dangerous to life. Nothing incriminating article has been recovery from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. False allegation has been levelled against the applicant. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant and is languishing in jail since 29.12.2022.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submits that applicant has committed the alleged offence, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, as per injury report, injury on the non-vital part, case of bail is made out, let the applicant- Amit Solanki involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each, one should be of family member of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶11

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶14

Order Date :- 13.4.2023 Jitendra

¶15

Digitally signed by :- JITENDRA KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amit Solanki v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Solanki 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

Rahul Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Singh Vs State of U.P.

Angad Yadav@ Lala Vs State of U.P.

Mushtaque Alam Vs State of U.P.

Sagar Dom Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh @ Abba Vs State of U.P.