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

Surendra Patel vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|27 February, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 22
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7704 of 2018 Applicant :- Surendra Patel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, the F.I.R. was lodged against unknown persons alleging that on 13.11.2017 they entered the house of complainant Nandeeni Sharma and attempted to loot. Subsequently, the named of the applicant was disclosed by the co-accused Pappu @ Sevaram.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is general allegations against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present case. Applicant was not named in the F.I.R. There is no evidence against the applicant except the confessional statement of co-accused Pappu @ Sevaram before the police. He is languishing in jail since 1.12.2017 (more than two and half months) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history.
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 Surendra Patel involved in Case Crime No. 932 of 2017, under Sections 307, 452, 393, 120-B IPC, Police Station Izzatnagar, 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 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 :- 27.2.2018//A. Singh
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

Surendra Patel vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 February, 2018
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • Rajeev Kumar Singh Parmar