Vivek Yadav v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41517 of 2023 Applicant :- Vivek Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Supplementary affidavit filed by the counsel for the applicant, is taken on record.

¶2Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and 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. 167 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 307, 323, 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. As per the allegations in the first information report the applicant along with two other named accused and one unknown person are alleged to have assaulted the informant. As per the medical report, the injured sustained seven injuries. The injury nos. 1 to 4 were kept under observation and x-ray was advised. The other injuries were found simple in nature. As per report of rediologist no abnormality was seen. Even in the statement of the injured, the applicant was not nominated as the principal offender, who caused injury on the head of the informant. The applicant is in jail since 6.7.2023 having no criminal history. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶4Learned A.G.A. has 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 role has been assigned to the applicant, further in the statement of the injured the applicant was not nominated as the principal offender, who caused injury on the head of the informant. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has presently remained confined for more than three 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, Vivek Yadav 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 :- 31.10.2023 S.S. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad