SANDEEP SINGH ALIAS BHUAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
BAIL/30760/2024 · 2025-10-13
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 192116 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 192116 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30760 of 2024 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised. Sixth supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Ram Prakash Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned counsel for the informant as well as Shri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 120 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 307 and 302 I.P.C., Police Station-Vindhyachal, District- Mirzapur, during the pendency of trial. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Satyam Singh Alias Manney has already been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 35352 of 2024. The applicant is languishing in jail since 08.08.2023. Criminal history assigned to the applicant stands explained. 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. 5. Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that although it is a case of parity but the brother of the applicant has threatened the informant and the brother of the applicant Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pranshu Dwivedi, Prashant Kumar Tripathi, Ram Prakash Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Desh Ratan Chaudhary, G.A., Sanjay Dwivedi, Shantanu Sandeep Singh Alias Bhuar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
has threatened the informant and dissuaded him from deposing before the Court. The said co-accused person is also in jail, hence, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail
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 has not been disputed by him. 7. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P. And Another, 2020 (11) SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case for bail is made out. 8.
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 Supreme 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 coupled with the judgment of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825, 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. 9. Let the applicant- Sandeep Singh Alias Bhuar, involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. BAIL No. 30760 of 2024 2
11. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 12. 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. October 14, 2025 Karan BAIL No. 30760 of 2024 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad