Shivendra Singh v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43520 of 2023 Applicant :- Shivendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Kant Shukla,Vikrant Neeraj Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶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. 248 of 2023, under Section 307 of I.P.C. and Sections 3/25/27 of the Arms Act, Police Station-Sector-113, District-Gautam Buddh Nagar during pendency of the trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant was not arrested at the spot and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant was nominated as an accused in the first information report in pursuance of a statement of co-accused, Naveen before the Police authorities. The said statement, insofar as, it implicates the applicant is unreliable. No recovery of any incriminating article has been made from the applicant. It is next contended that the identically placed co-accused, Umendra Bahadur Singh, has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41867 of 2023 vide order dated 27.09.2023. The applicant claims parity. The applicant is in jail since 04.07.2023, 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 facts from the record.

¶5Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the name of the applicant was disclosed by the person who was arrested at the spot. The applicant was not arrested at the spot. The identically placed co-accused, Umendra Bahadur Singh has been granted bail by the Court. Further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more almost four 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 delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶6Let the applicant, Shivendra 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 temper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; and, 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 Sachin Mishra High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad