The court has the discretion to grant bail after considering the circumstances of the case and the conduct of the accused, including the treatment of co-accused in similar situations.

Headnote:
Bail - Criminal Law - The court granted bail to the applicant, who was in judicial custody under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, after considering the circumstances of the case and the fact that the co-accused had already been granted bail. The court found that the applicant deserved to be enlarged on bail.
Fact of the Case:

The applicant was in judicial custody in a case involving an attack on a police constable. The first bail application was dismissed, and this was the second bail application.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the applicant deserved to be enlarged on bail, considering the circumstances and the fact that the co-accused had already been granted bail.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant should be granted bail, considering the allegations against him and the fact that the co-accused had been granted bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the circumstances of the case, including the absence of the applicant's involvement in the alleged incident and the fact that the co-accused had already been granted bail, and concluded that the applicant deserved to be enlarged on bail.
Final Decision: The bail application was allowed, and the applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties.

JUDGMENT

Ravindra Maithani, J. - Applicant-Boby Kohli is in judicial custody in FIR/Case Crime No. 180 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 186, 307, 324, 332, 333, 336, 353, 504 & 506 IPC, Police Station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. He has sought his release on bail.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. The first bail application was dismissed in non-prosecution on 17.11.2022. This is the second bail application.

4. According to FIR, on 20.03.2022, the applicant along with co-accused attacked a police constable with Lathi, Danda and Hockey Stick. The police constable was saved by Vinay Karnatak and another constable.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that it was a day of Holi Festival. The police personnel were passing remarks on the women passing by. Local boys objected to it. Thereafter, simple Marpeet took place. Applicant has no role in the matter. He has not done anything. Co-accused, Arun has already been enlarged on bail. It is a case of parity.

6. Learned State Counsel admits that co-accused, Arun has been granted bail.

7. In the case of co-accused, this Court had noted that he was neither named in the FIR nor injured took his name.

8. Learned State Counsel admits that this is the situation with the present applicant.

9. Having considered, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

10. The bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document