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

Hari Om vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|27 February, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 22
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7659 of 2018 Applicant :- Hari Om Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, the F.I.R. was lodged against two accused persons, namely, Vijay Pandey and Dr. Annu; alleging that on 20.6.2017 they abducted Ravishankar Mishra and Nagesh Mishra, subsequently, they recovered by the police.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Co-accused namely Ravindra @ Rajani, Vikram @ Mangi, Manoj Kumar Naresh and Chirmoli have already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 3.11.2017, 26.10.2017, 21.9.2017, 20.11.2017 vide Criminal Misc.
Bail Application Nos. 42600 of 2017, 40635 of 2017, 35535 of 2017 and 45052 of 2017, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. He is languishing in jail since 30.7.2017 (more than five and half months) and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial. Criminal history of the applicant has been properly explained.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that criminal history of the applicant has been explained.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Hari Om involved in Session Case No. 688 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No. 564 of 2017, under Sections 364 (Ka) and 342 IPC, Police Station Vrindawan, District Mathura 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 :- 27.2.2018//A. Singh
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

Hari Om vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 February, 2018
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • Pankaj Sharma