Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1801 (ALL)

Sateesh @ Bhoore v. State of U. P.

2015-07-08

ABHINAVA UPADHYA

body2015
JUDGMENT Abhinava Upadhya, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. By means of the present application the applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 3713/2014, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 393, 332, 323, 353, 504, 506, 324 I.P.C. and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station-Kotwali Orai, District-Jalaun. 3. The allegation against the applicant is that the applicant along with others attacked the complainant to cause grievous injury and with the intention of killing the complainant. The main role has been assigned to the co-accused Manish Rajput son of Dharam Pal Rajput who is stated to have fired shots from the fire arm. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant and he has falsely been implicated in the case. The co-accused Manish Rajput has already been granted bail by this Court by order dated 21.1.2015 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 706 of 2015 and, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. However, learned A.G.A. has not disputed the aforesaid facts. 6. The role of the applicant in the aforesaid incident cannot be said to be such that the applicant be denied bail. The applicant is in jail since 2.4.2015 and he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicant Sateesh @ Bhoore involved in Case Crime No. 3713/2014, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 393, 332, 323, 353, 504, 506, 324 I.P.C. and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station-Kotwali Orai, District-Jalaun be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.