Allowed

Jangbahadur Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Jul 2018BAIL/19077/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19077 of 2018, the Hon'ble Court granted bail to the applicant Jangbahadur Yadav involved in offenses under IPC Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 218, and 120-B. The application was heard alongside a charge sheet filed with significant delay, and the court considered arguments regarding delay in investigation before granting bail with specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Jangbahadur Yadav is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding tampering with evidence, cooperation in trial, and no further crimin

Jangbahadur Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19077 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Jangbahadur Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Shoeb Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,R.S.Dubey

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State Shri R.S. Dubey, learned counsel for the informant and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Jangbahadur Yadav with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 1300 of 2009 ( Case No. 10060 of 2017), under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 218, 120-B IPC, Police Station Cantt., DistrictGorakhpur, during pendency of trial.

¶7

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with some ulterior motive. The allegation against the applicant is that applicant and coaccused have demolished the 'Chhapar' of the informant and have made Chak road and have got the revenue record manipulated and shown the land in dispute as Chak road therein.

¶8

Learned counsel for the informant has placed before this court the order dated 3.6.2014 passed by this court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 9556 of 2014 directing the investigating officer to conclude the investigation at the earliest. The argument of the learned counsel for th informant is that since 2009 the applicant and other coaccuseds managed to delay the investigation. The charge sheet has been filed on 12.12.2017 after about four years of the direction of this court and nine years after alleged incident took place. Learned counsel for the informant admitted that the revenue record has already been corrected on the initiation of District Magistrate, Gorakhpur and 'Rasta' has been corrected. The applicant and other co-accused are not permitting him to

¶9

construct the 'Chappar' over the land in dispute since he is under constant threat. Learned counsel for the informant has further argued that there are two cases against the applicant being case crime no. 30 of 2005 and 23/A of 2010.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has filed rejoinder affidavit stating that applicant is neither named in case crime no. 23/A of 2010 nor required therein. However in case crime no. 30 of 2005, N.C.R. was lodged against the applicant, it is still N.C.R. and has not been investigated by the police.The applicant is in jail since 11.3.2018. There is no serious criminal history against the applicant. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail

¶11

Having considered the submissions of the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant Jangbahadur Yadav involved in the aforesaid crime 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 that :-

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶16

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶17

Order Date :- 30.7.2018 Atul kr. sri.

Jangbahadur Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jangbahadur 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amit @ Lalit Vs State of U.P.

Sahid Beg and Another Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Dharmveer @ Dharma Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Vs State of U.P.