Advocates:
['HANUMAN PRASAD MISHRA', '', 'RAVI PRAKASH SINGH', 'G A', '', 'ANIL KUMAR']

Court No. - 71

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13183 of 2021

Applicant :- Mangoo Lal

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Hanuman Prasad Mishra,Ravi Prakash

Singh

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Anil Kumar,

learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned

AGA-I, appearing for the State and perused the material brought on

record.

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that

the applicant have been falsely implicated in the present case due

to ulterior motive. It is next contended that the first information

report of the alleged incident is said to have been lodged after two

day for which no plausible explanation has been given, which itself

falsify the prosecution story. It is further submitted that some

dispute with regard to money was going on between the parties,

which has been dragged into criminal prosecution of the applicant.

It is further submitted that four persons were named in the FIR only

general role has been levelled against the applicant. Several other

submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations

made against the applicant has also been placed forth before the

Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to

the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at

length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is

ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make

himself available before the court whenever required. It has also

been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since

18.1.2021. It has been pointed out that the applicants has no

criminal history.

Learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. have

vehemently opposed the prayer.

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides,

nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of

conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie

satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory

of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the

Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of

Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2

SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the

case, I find it to be a case of bail.

Let applicants- Mangoo Lal, be released on bail in Case Crime

No.205 of 2020, under Sections- 323, 308, 504 IPC, Police Station-

Sidhpura, District- Kasganj, on furnishing a personal bond and two

sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of

magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

1. The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings

pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

2. He will not tamper with the witnesses.

3. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified

by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above

conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and

send the applicant to prison.

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are

strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not

be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the

case.

In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a

ground for cancellation of bail.

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order

downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested

by the counsel of the party concerned.

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity

of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of

High Court Allahabad and shall ma