Allowed

Sahil Kumar Sonkar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Allahabad HC17 Oct 2024BAIL/10749/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10749 of 2024, the Allahabad High Court granted bail to Sahil Kumar Sonkan, an accused in a case involving sections 147, 148, 323, and 307 IPC. The court allowed the prayer on grounds of parity with a co-accused and lack of criminal history, imposing standard bail conditions including forfeiture proceedings for absconding or misuse of liberty.

What did the court decide?

Bail released personally on furnishing a bond and two sureties, with conditions regarding evidence tampering, witness intimidation, non-absconding, and appearance in court under threat of prosecution.

Sahil Kumar Sonkar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:70084

¶2

Court No. - 31

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10749 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sahil Kumar Sonkar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

(Through Video Conferencing)

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.340 of 2024 under sections 147, 148, 323, 307 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Nagar, district Raebareli,

¶9

It is alleged in the prosecution case that on 21.6.2024 at around 8.30p.m., named accused persons came to the house of injured and on some pretext took the injured to Ram Leela ground. 10-15 unknown persons were also there. All of a sudden they started beating one Vansh Chaurasiya with iron rod and danda. Thereafter, Devraj Sonkar and Aklavya Chaurasiya have also been beaten.

¶10

Learned counsel for applicant submits that general role has been assigned to six named and 10-15 unknown persons. The coaccused Uday Sonkar who was assigned the similar role has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 30.08.2024 passed in Criminal Mi9sc. Bail Application No.8625 of 2024. Applicant claims parity. Applicant has no criminal history however, he is in jail since 22.07.2024.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer however, does not dispute the fact that role assigned to the present applicant is similar

¶12

to that of co-accused.

¶13

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.07.2024 having no criminal history and the fact that applicant claims parity with the bail order of co-accused Uday Sonkar (supra), without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the grounds of parity.

¶15

Let the applicant Sahil Kumar Sonkar be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶16

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.

¶20

(v) 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.

¶21

(vi) 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.

¶22

Order Date :- 17.10.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sahil Kumar Sonkar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahil Kumar Sonkar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Ankur Saroj @ Habbu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Shahrukh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Ankur Saroj @ Habbu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Sahil Kumar Sonkar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Suraj Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Lalit Kumar Tiwari and Another vs NTPC Ltd. Thru. Cmd New Delhi and 2 Others