Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 34 (ALL)

Kallu @ Jitendra v. State of U. P.

2020-01-06

AJIT SINGH

body2020
JUDGMENT : 1. Sri Virendra Kumar Gupta, Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of informant, which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. 3. By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 141 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148 and 302/34 I.P.C., P.S. Srinagar, district-Mahoba and is in jail since 30.10.2019, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial. 4. The report of this matter was lodged on 14.10.2019 by the complainant Madan Raikwar on the basis of suspicion against Vystwah Kedar, Vystwah Kalyan Rajpoot, Vystwah Maha Prasad and Vystwah Satish @ Pappu Rajpoot on the allegation that at about 10:30 P.M. in night some one fired gun shot stealthily on the son of complainant, who along with his friends were doing watching of fish in pond. He succumbed to the injuries during treatment. The matter was investigated and accused were arrested and sent to jail. 5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused Prakash Chandra has already been enlarged on bail by this Court by order dated 20.12.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application no. 56224 of 2019, copy of bail order produced by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of Prakash Chandra who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. 6. The prayer for bail has vehemently been opposed by learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the matter has not been disputed by him. 7. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail on the ground of parity. 8. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the matter has not been disputed by him. 7. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail on the ground of parity. 8. In view of the above, let the applicant, Kallu @ Jitendra be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in the aforesaid case with the following conditions :- (a) The applicant shall attend the court according to the conditions of the bond executed by him. (b) 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.