AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 355 wordsAlok K. Singh, J.
Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused record.
The applicant is involved in Case Crime No.174 of 2008, under Sections 302, 120B I.P.C., Police Station Krishna Nagar, District Lucknow.
It is submitted that the F.I.R. in this case is against unknown persons. The complicity of the applicant is said to be based on the confessional statement of main accused Ramu Dwivedi and the last seen evidence of one Dinesh Gupta (Annexure6). The role attributed to the applicant along with Vikas alias Monu and Ravi Nath Singh alias Ravi Thakur is that of catching hold. Out of them bail has already been granted to Vikas alias Monu by this Court vide Annexure7. Similarly coaccused Ravi Nath Singh alias Ravi Thakur has also been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order passed today itself. It is therefore said that his case is distinguishable and is also entitled to get bail on the ground of parity with the aforesaid coaccused. There does not appear to be any quarrel on the point that his case is distinguishable and also the parity with the aforesaid Vikas alias Monu. He is said to be in jail from 22.05.2008. There is no criminal history against him.
Nothing substantial could be said from the other side. However, the bail is opposed by learned A.G.A.
The points pertaining to nature of accusation, danger of accused absconding or fleeing if released on bail, character, behaviour and position of the accused, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering the witnesses, prima facie satisfaction regarding proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution case were duly considered.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and without entering into the merits of the case and particularly having regard to the ground of parity and also the fact that the case of the applicant is distinguishable from other coaccused, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let the applicant (Ritish alias Pintu) be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/court concerned.