Allowed

Saurabh v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2024/6082/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed. Court granted bail to applicant Saurabh, noting no grievous injury resulted and co-accused persons were already released, despite allegations of carrying an iron rod in a Section 307, 504, 506 IPC case involving hockey stick assault.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount.

Saurabh Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:48992

¶2

Court No. - 31

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6082 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Saurabh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Farooq Ayoob,Mansi Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Farooq Ayoob, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 910 of 2023, under Sections 34, 323, 504, 506, 307, 341 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 12.08.2023 against five persons, including the applicant, alleging that because of some old dispute, all the accused persons had attacked the informant and assaulted him with hockey sticks and iron rods. It is stated that the applicant was carrying an iron rod and rest of the accused persons were carrying hockey sticks.

¶9

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case.

¶10

The applicant's involvement in five cases has been disclosed in para 23 of the bail application and involvement in five more cases

¶11

has been disclosed in para 3 of a supplementary affidavit. The applicant has been granted bail in 8 cases; in one case, the Investigating Officer has filed a final report and in one case, he has not been summoned till date.

¶12

The eight co-accused persons have already been granted bail in the present case.

¶13

No grievous injury was caused in the incident.

¶14

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶15

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that although, it is alleged that the applicant was carrying an iron rod whereas the other accused persons were carrying hockey and other sticks, there is no specific allegation of any injury having been caused by the applicant; the victim has not suffered any grievous injury in the incident and that eight co-accused persons have already been granted bail in the present case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

¶16

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant- Saurabh be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶18

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶19

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶20

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court.

¶21

[Subhash Vidyarthi,J.]

¶22

Order Date :- 19.7.2024 Ruhi H.

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RUHI HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Saurabh v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jagat Ram Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Vishal Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Ajeet Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Ram Shabad Yadav vs State of Up and 6 Others

Sukhpal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Vyas Shukla vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.