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

Vipin Sharma vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|24 December, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 88
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44695 of 2021 Applicant :- Vipin Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bhupendra Singh
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 under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Vipin Sharma seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 393 of 2019, under Sections 323, 308, 504, 506 I.P.C. registered at P.S.- Vrindavan, District- Mathura.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant-Vipin Sharma is that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and has not committed the alleged offence. The prosecution story is false and frivolous. The case was lodged against the applicant only to pressurize for compromise. The alleged incident took place on 4.5.2019 wherein F.I.R. was lodged on 13.5.2019. The distance of police station from the place of occurrence is 3 km. west. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. Only general role of beating has been assigned to co-accused persons. Further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 9.9.2021.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant caused grievous injuries to the injured. Specific role has been assigned to the applicant.
Perusal of record reveals that there is 9 days delay in lodging of the F.I.R. The injured Sukhvir Singh has not assigned any specific role to the applicant. There is only general allegation that the applicant along with two other co-accused persons have beaten the injured.
Nature of accusation, evidence collected by I.O. in support of the charge, gravity of offence, nature and severity of punishment in case of conviction, complicity of accused and all other attending circumstances were duly considered.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting upon merits of the case, a case for bail is made out.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Vipin Sharma involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions;
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
2. The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.
3. During trial, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities.
In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 24.12.2021 SA
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

Vipin Sharma vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
24 December, 2021
Judges
  • Anil Kumar Ojha
Advocates
  • Amit Kumar Srivastava