Anil v. State of U.P

Court No. - 44 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47313 of 2023 Applicant :- Anil Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Shanker Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶2The FIR in question was lodged against unknown person. Subsequently based upon the recovery, which is not in terms of Section 100 of Cr.P.C., the applicant was apprehended.

¶3The Counsel for the applicant argues that two co-accused persons, namely, Veer Vikram Bahadur Singh and Mohd. Mukeem have been enlarged on bail. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in the supplementary affidavit, which is taken on record.

¶4Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer.

¶5Considering the fact that prima facie, the recovery is not in terms of Section 100 of Cr.P.C. and the co-accused on similar allegations have been enlarged on bail, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶6Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶7Let the applicant Anil be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.109 of 2023, under Sections 457, 380, 411 IPC, Police Station Purkaji, District Muzaffar Nagar on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

(c) 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. Order Date :- 6.11.2023 akverma High Court of Judicature at Allahabad