Allahabad High Court
Satya Pal Singh vs State Of U.P. on 8 February, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6101 of 2023
Applicant :- Satya Pal Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Bais
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Shri Ashok Kumar Singh Bais, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Vibhav Anand Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in S.T. No.134 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No.652 of 2017, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Sahaswan, District Badaun, during the pendency of trial.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons are stated to have fired at the deceased Prempal in furtherance of common intention on 18.11.2017 at 8:00 am.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he was exonerated by the police and the charge-sheet was filed against the other three co-accused persons. The applicant has been summoned by the court by invoking powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C. The main role of firing has been assigned to co-accused Veer Singh. The role of the applicant is at par with co-accused person Shantipal who has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 8.5.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.17132 of 2018. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.01.2023, having no criminal history. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused, 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 been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused and of no criminal history of the applicant, have not been disputed by him.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and also taking into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court passed in the case of Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and the judgment of this Court passed in the case of Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Cri.L.J. 938, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail on the ground of parity. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.
8. Let the applicant- Satya Pal Singh involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
(v) 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.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
10. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
10. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 8.2.2023
Ravi Kant
