Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Dilip Srivastava vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 October, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25186 of 2021 Applicant :- Dilip Srivastava Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Singh,Om Prakash,Raj Kiran Chaudhary,Syed Mohammad Abbas Abdy Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Radhe Shyam Gupta
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard over bail application moved by applicant, Dilip Srivastava, in Case Crime No. 98 of 2021, under Section 326A IPC, Police Station-Jaitpura, District-Varanasi.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused- applicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 26.05.2021; he is of no criminal antecedent other than one explained in the affidavit, and there is no likelihood of fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case of release on bail. Report was got lodged prior to this report by the applicant himself against the informant side that was for offence of outraging modesty of girl of applicant; alleged occurrence was said to be of acid attack, whereas medical Board, in its opinion, has concluded that no acid was found and it was a case of acid attack and suspected to be of some corrosive things; Board has specifically opined that there was no mark of any burn injuries as was there in bed head ticket, hence it is a case of dispute in between two neighbors residing in same apartment and this is a false implication. Hence, bail has been prayed for.
Learned AGA as well as counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed with this contention that the statement of prosecutrix of offence of outraging modesty is entirely with variation and contradiction; the applicant is an influential person, who got manipulated registration of above case crime number, and then after, this acid attack was there; rejoinder affidavit is with photograph of victim- injured and this medical board examination is of after three months of occurrence and injuries were not detected because of lapse of time, and it never requires acid attack under Section 326 or 326B IPC; rather any corrosive substance for acid value may amount an acid attack; injuries is also not noted except eight category of injuries, which has been noted by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Maqbool vs. State of U.P., (2019) 11 SCC 395, in present case one of above eight injuries i.e. burn is there, hence there is every likelihood of fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case release on bail.
Having heard and gone through materials placed on record, it is apparent that both informant and accused are next door neighbors; they are living in the same apartment in upper floor and down floor; there is also previous case registered; quarrel is there.
Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but, without commenting on merits of the case, a case for bail is made out.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Dilip Srivastava, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, each, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.
2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.
3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.
4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.
5. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court, Allahabad.
6. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by counsel of the party concerned.
7. The concerned Court/ Authority/ Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad, and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.
Order Date :- 29.10.2021 Dhirendra/
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Dilip Srivastava vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 October, 2021
Judges
  • Ram Krishna Gautam
Advocates
  • Jai Prakash Singh Om Prakash Raj Kiran Chaudhary Syed Mohammad Abbas Abdy