Udai Pratap Singh v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40603 of 2023 Applicant :- Udai Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilanand Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A., Pooja Singh Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Mohit Singh, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Pooja Singh, counsel for the informant. Perused the record.

¶2The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 200 of 2023, under Sections 307, 336, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Lar, District-Deoria during pendency of the trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. In the first information report four persons including the applicant have been nominated. The co-accused Santosh is alleged to have caused injury on the head of the informant/injured. Subsequently, in the statement of injured all the nominated persons in the first information are alleged to have caused injury. It is contended that the said statement is an after-thought and it discredits the prosecution case. A vague and general role has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as the principal offender in the F.I.R. nor in the statement of the injured, who caused injury on the head of the informant. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 5 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 25.7.2023. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶4Learned A.G.A. and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶5Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that a vague and general has been assigned to the applicant. The applicant has not been nominated as principal offender, who caused the injury on the head of the informant. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than two months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶6Let the applicant, Udai Pratap Singh involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶7In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 12.10.2023 S.S. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad