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

Sachin vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|21 December, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48767 of 2018 Applicant :- Sachin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Parcha filed by Sri Brijesh Sahai, learned Advocate on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant is innocent and has not committed the present offence. Applicant is also not named in the FIR. For the first time in the statement of Alimuddin name of the applicant surfaced along with other co- accused. It was also argued that co-accused Harvir @ Pahalwan and Kuldip alias Kullu have been granted bail by this Court on 30.11.2018 and 10.12.2018 vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1353 of 2018 and 45956 of 2018. He further submits that 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. He is languishing in jail since 27.11.2017 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and argued that there is recovery of country made pistol on the pointing out of the accused appellant and the role of the accused appellant is distinguishable from the role of the co-accused who have been released on bail.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and also the bail order passed in respect of co-accused Harvir @ Pahalwan and Kuldip alias Kullu and 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 the applicant Sachin involved in Case Crime No. 872 of 2017, under Section 302, 201, 34 IPC, P.S. Sikandarabad, District Bulandshahar be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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 :- 21.12.2018 Sachdeva
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

Sachin vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
21 December, 2018
Judges
  • Om Prakash Vii
Advocates
  • Pankaj Kumar Singh