Allowed

Harikesh Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Feb 2018BAIL/1088/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh heard Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1088 of 2018 filed by Harikesh Yadav. The court examined submissions regarding false implication and granted bail, subject to personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Harikesh Yadav released on bail on personal bond with two sureties in like amount, without deposit of money; conditions imposed regarding attendance, non-tampering, and ban on illegal activi

Harikesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1088 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Harikesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Paritosh Sukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties, which are taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Paritosh Sukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Purshottam Maurya, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his prayer for bail submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive and he has committed no offence. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have 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 19.12.2017. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.

¶8

The allegation against the applicant is that he has taken Rs 6,50,000/- from the complainant on the pretext of giving job but the same has not been returned by him and thus the present FIR was lodged by the complainant.

¶9

It is next submitted that the co-accused has been granted bail by the court below, copy of which is annexed on page 23 of the bail application. The applicant is directed to deposit Rs.2.00 lacs by way of F.D.R. before the court below in the name of the complainant.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶12

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Harikesh Yadav involved in Case Crime No.677 of 2012, under sections 420, 406, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Qwarsi, District Aligarh be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶14

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶15

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

¶16

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶18

Order Date :- 19.2.2018 IA

Harikesh Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harikesh Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satya Narain Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Shanker Vs State of U.P.

Jaipal Alias Karuwa Vs State of U.P.

Harveer Singh Vs State of U.P.

Anshuman Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Pinder @ Rupendra Vs State of U.P.