Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Sudhanshu Rai vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|31 May, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 86
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15619 of 2021 Applicant :- Sudhanshu Rai Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 87 of 2021, under Sections 394, 411 IPC, Police Station Rohania, District Varanasi, during pendency of trial.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that the offence under Section 394, 411 IPC is not made out against the applicant. Applicant is not named in the FIR. He further submits that recovery of Rs. 2,000/- from the possession of the applicant is his own pocket money. The true facts of the case are that the applicant had gone his Nanihal at Rohania to leave his mother to her parental house. The applicant has no relation with co-accused Shailendra Yadav. The offence is triable by the Magistrate First Class. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.02.2021. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the trial by all means. There is no chance of applicant fleeing from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses, as such, he be released on bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that looted money Rs. 2,000/- has been recovered from the possession of the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of counsel for the parties, particularly the applicant is not named in the FIR and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant Sudhanshu Rai be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
1. The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the dates fixed after release.
2. The applicant will not tamper with the witnesses.
3. The applicant will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.
The bail application is accordingly allowed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of the High Court, Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the parties concerned.
The concerned authority/court/official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of the High Court, Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 31.5.2021 v.k.updh.
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

Sudhanshu Rai vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
31 May, 2021
Judges
  • Anil Kumar Ojha
Advocates
  • Anand Kumar Singh