The Court granted bail to Ankur Yadav charged under Sections 379 and 411 IPC. The application was allowed by ensuring the applicant follows conditions regarding court appearances and behavior, including monetary sureties.
The applicant was released on bail on a personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 23
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11823 of 2018
Applicant :- Ankur Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Rekha Dikshit,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that accused applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. The FIR has been lodged against unknown person. The applicant has been falsely implicated in Case Crime No.145 of 2014, under Sections 379 and 411 IPC, Police Station Hari Parvat, District Agra, in this case he has been released on bail. The accused-applicant is languishing in jail since 3.4.2016. It is next submitted that the applicant is neither a previous convict nor he has any criminal history. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses . In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and 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, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant, Ankur Yadav, involved in Case Crime No.219 of 2011, under Sections 379 and 411 IPC, Police Station - Etamdaula, District - Agra, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is
issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 2.4.2018 KR
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the accused applicant is entitled to bail in a case of theft and dishonestly receiving stolen property.
Whether the applicant has reasonable apprehension of fleeing or tampering with witnesses.
6 provisions across 2 enactments
Ankur Yadav
Rekha Dikshit
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
