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

Kallu Yadav vs State Of U P

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

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 22
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11098 of 2018 Applicant :- Kallu Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State, and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, FIR was lodged against nine accused persons namely, Shishir Dubey, Arun Yadav, Pradeep Yadav, Deepak Yadav, Rohit Yadav, Titu Yadav, Anshu Yadav, Pankaj Yadav, Pawan Yadav and one unknown person alleging that on 8.12.2017 at 6:30 P.M.they shot fire with their respective firearms at complainant Abhinendra Verma and Sonal @ Solanki, threatened them and damaged Fridge, coffee machine 'patties' machine etc. However, they escaped themselves.
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; all injuries of victim are simple in nature and there is no firearm injury; he is languishing in jail since 20.2.2018 (more than one month) 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. Co- accused namely Teetu Yadav @ Pushpendra Yadav has been granted bail by this Court on 13.2.2018 vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4208 of 2018; since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail.
On the other hand, 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 applicant has no criminal history.
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 view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let applicant Kallu Yadav involved in Case Crime No.1020 of 2017, under Section 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 504, 506, 386, 427 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Etawah 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 :- 27.3.2018 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

Kallu Yadav vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 March, 2018
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • Pankaj Kumar Mishra