Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(All) 26768
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
RAKESH SINGH – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
BAIL/56692/2022
An accused is entitled to bail if they have no prior criminal history, the co-accused has been granted bail, and the prosecution cannot provide a satisfactory dispute against the applicant's submissions.
Headnote:
BAIL - SECTION 439 CR.P.C. - APPLICANT ENTITLED TO BAIL - NO CRIMINAL HISTORY PRIOR TO INSTANT CASE - CO-ACCUSED GRANTED BAIL - NO SATISFACTORY DISPUTE FROM RECORD BY AGA
Fact of the Case:
Applicant seeks bail in a case involving charges of attempt to murder, robbery, and theft. The applicant was not named in the initial FIR but was later named by the victim. The applicant claims false implication and lack of evidence against him. The co-accused has been granted bail, and the applicant seeks parity.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant had been in jail since 2015 and had no prior criminal history. The court also noted that the co-accused had been granted bail and that the prosecution could not satisfactorily dispute the applicant's submissions.
Issues: Whether the applicant is entitled to bail considering the lack of criminal history, co-accused being granted bail, and prosecution's inability to dispute applicant's submissions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principles of bail, considering the applicant's lack of criminal history, the co-accused being granted bail, and the prosecution's inability to provide a satisfactory dispute against the applicant's submissions.
Final Decision: The court allowed the applicant's bail application and ordered his release on bail subject to certain conditions.
Court No. - 75
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56692
of 2022
Applicant :- Rakesh Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vikas Sahai,
learned AGA for the State-opposite party.
The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been
filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case
Crime No. 255 of 2015, under Sections 307, 394 and 411 I.P.C.,
Police Station- Gulariha, District- Gorakhpur during the
pendency of trial.
It is submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in
the instant case. The applicant was not named in the first
information report. The applicant and co-accused, Pintu
Madhesiya were named by Umesh Singh on 30.06.2015. The
said statement is an afterthought and is unreliable. No test
identification parade was conducted. The co-accused- Pintu
Madhesiya has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal
Misc. Bail Application No. 1765 of 2016 vide order dated
20.01.2016. The applicant claims parity. Prior to the instant case
the applicant does not have any criminal history, however after
his arrest he has been implicated in other cases. The applicant is
in jail since 18.09.2015. In case, he is enlarged on bail, he will
not misuse the said liberty.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not
satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.
Having regard to the submissions made but without
commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the
applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant- Rakesh Singh, involved in the aforesaid case
be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two
sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court
concerned subject to the conditions that he:
(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;
(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the
prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation
application before this Court.
Order Date :- 11.1.2023
Sachin Mishra
Digitally signed by :-
SACHIN MISHRA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Digitally signed by :-
SACHIN MISHRA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
