Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Dinesh vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 February, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 22
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47613 of 2017 Applicant :- Dinesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Gopal Krishna Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Surya Prakash Dubey
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Short counter affidavit has been filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant and learned AGA for the State, and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, FIR was lodged against seven accused persons, namely, Jawahar Lal, Chunnu Lal, Dinesh, Sitaram, Radheyshyam, Raja and Vikki and some unknown persons alleging that on 23.4.2017 they armed with 'lathi-danda' & 'saria' assaulted Lachchu Prasad, Haridwar, Uttam, Prince, Chandan and Sonu, Aditya received head injury and fracture was found in the x-ray report and one tooth of Jawahar was broken.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; general role was assigned to all the accused; Co-accused Sitaram, Jawahar, Raja @ Yuvraj and Vikky have already been enlarged by this Court this Court, copy of which has been taken on record; the role of the applicant is identical to that of the co- accused who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity; he is languishing in jail since 9.8.2017(more than six months) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and admitted that he has received no criminal history against this accused, the role of this accused is identical to the role of the accused who have already been enlarged on bail.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and the fact that identically placed co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is deemed fit to enlarge the applicant on bail.
Let applicant Dinesh involved in Case Crime No.244 of 2017, under Sections 147, 323, 308, 325, 452, 427, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Mau be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 26.2.2018 A. Tripathi
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

Dinesh vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
26 February, 2018
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • Gopal Krishna Pandey