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

Sonu vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 July, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13829 of 2018 Applicant :- Sonu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- K.N. Raha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Counter affidavit, filed on behalf of the State, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
According to the prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against nine accused persons, namely, Rizwan, Yunus, Raj Mohammad, Ganga Saran, Sonu, Farhan, Imran, Anwar Ahmad, Irfan alleging that on 17.12.2017 five persons, namely, Rizwan, Yunus, Raj Mohammad, Ganga Saran and Sonu were arrested by the Police personnel, whereas other managed to escape; 6 quintal beef and instrument relating to slaughtering were recovered from the spot.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The role of the applicant is identical to that of the co-accused, namely, Raj Mohammad, who has been granted bail by Co- ordinate Bench of this Court on 21.06.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 22705 of 2018, hence he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.12.2017 (more than seven months); having no criminal history; there is no independent witness against the applicant 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 A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and admitted that the applicant has got no criminal history and the case of the applicant is identical to the case of co-accused Raj Mohammad.
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 opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Sonu involved in Case Crime No. 1291 of 2017, under Section 3/5A/8 U.P. Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, P.S. Baradari, District Bareilly be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the 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 :- 26.7.2018 OP
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

Sonu vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
26 July, 2018
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • K N Raha