SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(All) 3829

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Harsh Kumar, J.
Banti - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 33274 of 2016
Decided On : 14-12-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant :- Lalit Kumar Srivastava,Ankur Jee Srivastav
For the Opposite Party :- G.A.

The court's decision to grant bail was based on the complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, and totality of facts and circumstances, without commenting on the merits of the case.

Headnote:

Bail - Criminal Law - The court granted bail to the applicant based on the complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, and totality of facts and circumstances, without commenting on the merits of the case.

Fact of the Case:

The applicant sought bail, contending that he was falsely implicated in a case involving an alleged incident where he was accused of causing a neck injury with a knife. The victim's statement assigned the role of causing the injury to the applicant and another individual. The injury report showed a single non-life-threatening injury on the neck.

Finding of the Court:

The court found it to be a fit case for bail, considering the complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, and totality of facts and circumstances, without commenting on the merits of the case.

Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail in a case involving charges under Sections 323, 504, 506, and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

Ratio Decidendi: The court granted bail based on the complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, and totality of facts and circumstances, without commenting on the merits of the case.

Final Decision: The applicant was granted bail in Case Crime No.728 of 2015, subject to specific conditions.

JUDGMENT

Counter affidavit filed by A.G.A. is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated for the alleged incident dated 20.8.2015; that the applicant did not make any assault on the victim with the knife? or otherwise; that in F.I.R. the role of causing neck injury by knife has been assigned? to applicant while in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the victim has assigned the role of causing neck injury to applicant and Govind collectively; that injury report shows a single injury on neck which has not been mentioned as dangerous to life in the injury report at annexure-2; that the applicant may not be considered to be author of the neck injury of the injured; that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case under Section 304 IPC in which due to accident the husband of victim expired in which the applicant has been granted bail; that the applicant has no other criminal history; that the applicant undertakes that he will not make misuse the liberty of bail; that the applicant is in custody since 13.3.3016.

3. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail.

4. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

5. Let the applicant Banti be released on bail in Case Crime No.728 of 2015, under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 307 IPC, P.S. Sikandara, District Agra, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions: -

(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.

6. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top