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

Rohit vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|28 February, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 22
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8070 of 2018 Applicant :- Rohit Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Azad Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in the FIR, there were six persons and 3-4 unknown persons, out of which charge sheet has been submitted against four accused namely, Jitendra Yadav, Rohit Yadav, Sunil Sharma and Yogendra @ pappu. Co- accused Yogendra Sharma @ Pappu Mahraj, Sunil Sharma and Jitendra Yadav have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 19.4.2017 and 9.10.2017 vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 8997 of 2017, 9000 of 2017 and 29595 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 on the ground of parity. Criminal history of the applicant has been properly explained. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is in jail since 21.11.2016 (more than one year and three months) and if he is released, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
The prayer for bail has been opposed by learned A.G.A. However, he does not dispute the fact that the similarly placed co-accused has been granted bail by this Court and admitted that criminal history of the applicant has been explained.
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.
In view of the above, let the applicant Rohit involved in Case Crime No.112 of 2014, under Sections 308, 452, 323, 504 IPC, Police Station Badagaon, District Jhansi be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing 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 :- 28.2.2018//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

Rohit vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 February, 2018
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • Azad Khan