1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sonu vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 April, 2019


Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17623 of 2019 Applicant :- Sonu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- S.P.S. Chauhan, Smt. Meenakshi Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri S.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shoiab Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Sonu with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.1124 of 2018, under Sections 307, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Delhi Gate, District Aligarh.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is argued that as per allegation in the FIR the daughter of the first informant Muskan was married to applicant 3 years ago and as the applicant was harassing Muskan - daughter of first informant, therefore, she was brought back by the first informant. On 17.12.2018 at about 11 a.m. the applicant went to the informant's place where he tried to take her (Muskan) forcibly and on being intercepted by her brother Shamsher the applicant attacked upon him by knife and caused injury on his stomach. As per injury and x-ray reports no internal damage has been caused. It is argued that after 20 days of the alleged incident, a knife has been recovered in which no blood stain was found and it does not connect with the incident. It is next contended that applicant has no criminal history and there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is languishing in jail since 04.01.2019. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 29.4.2019 Anand Sri./-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.

Sonu vs State Of U P


High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

29 April, 2019
  • S Manju Rani Chauhan
  • S P S Chauhan Smt Meenakshi Chauhan