Allowed

Eraz v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2024/8122/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application where the applicant, initially not in the FIR, was implicated only via a statement that later proved hostile. The earlier rejection set aside; bail granted on personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the amount satisfactory to the Court.

Eraz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:53201

¶2

Court No. - 31

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8122 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Eraz Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sachin Verma,Praveen Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Praveen Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.205 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station- Talgaon, District- Sitapur.

¶8

The first bail application of the applicant has been rejected by this Court vide its order dated 29.11.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.11938 of 2023.

¶9

The applicant was not named in the F.I.R. and he was implicated in the instant case only on the basis of the statement of the injured recorded by the Investigation Officer. Subsequent to the rejection of the first bail application, the injured has been examined as P.W.-2 in the trial and he has been declared to be hostile.

¶10

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

¶11

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact , coupled with the fact that the fact that the applicant was implicated solely on the basis of the statement of the injured recorded by the Investigation Officer and he has not supported the prosecution case and before the trial, he declared to be hostile, without making any observations which

¶12

may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail.

¶13

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant- Eraz 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 the following conditions: -

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶18

Order Date :- 2.8.2024 Sachin

¶19

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Eraz v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Eraz v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Atul Kumar Verma vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Ankit Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko

Dinesh Kumar Tripathi and 7 Others vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Smt. Komal Shahi vs Ankur Jaiswal

Mohan Rawat vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Meera Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko