Ram Surat @ Ram Surat Nishad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:38733

¶2

Court No. - 33

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5362 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ram Surat @ Ram Surat Nishad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶7

The instant case is being heard through Video Conferencing.

¶8

Heard Sri Rajesh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ravi Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0009 of 2021, under Sections 308, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station - Chanda, District - Sultanpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶10

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Ram Sunder Nishad Alias Alok Nishad, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 7.3.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2221 of 2022. He further submitted that since the case of the applicant is at par to the co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.04.2024, having no criminal history. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.

¶11

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused and of no criminal history of the applicant, have not been disputed by him.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, evidence on record, pending trial and in the light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 coupled with the

¶13

judgement of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825 , without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶14

Let the applicant- Ram Surat @ Ram Surat Nishad , who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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.

¶15

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.

¶17

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

¶18

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶19

Order date: 22.5.2024 Siddhant

¶20

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Surat @ Ram Surat Nishad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Surat @ Ram Surat Nishad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohd. Shaheem @ Kasim vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Veerendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko.

Veerendra Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko.

Ram Surat @ Ram Surat Nishad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Kuldeep Singh Chauhan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home

Mohd. Shaheem @ Kasim vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow