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

Seshnath @ Nadiya vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|24 September, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35883 of 2018 Applicant :- Seshnath @ Nadiya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Yadav,Arvind Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Sri Arvind Kumar Rai, learned counsels for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.316 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 376-D, 120-B, 506 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Mirzamurad, District Varanasi, with the prayer to release him on bail.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that co-accused Rajan Bind against whom the victim has made allegation of rape along with the applicant, has been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court by an order dated 4.7.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.24684 of 2018. He further submitted that in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix has not made any allegation of rape against the applicant. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.12.2017 having no criminal antecedents.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant Seshnath @ Nadiya, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that :-
(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
(2) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;
(3) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial Court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the Courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 24.9.2018 Hasnain
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

Seshnath @ Nadiya vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
24 September, 2018
Judges
  • Rajul Bhargava
Advocates
  • Sunil Kumar Yadav Arvind Kumar Rai