Allowed

Ajay Singh @ Ajju v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2018BAIL/2064/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cr. Misc. Bail Application filed by Ajay Singh @ Ajju challenging implicatioin in an FIR alleging recovery of stolen money under IPC Sections 395 and 201. The court allowed bail citing lack of cogent evidence and fear of witness tampering, directing furnishing of a personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond of rupees two lakhs and two sureties of like amount.

Ajay Singh @ Ajju Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2064 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Ajay Singh @ Ajju Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shachindra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri S.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶6

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. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR and the FIR has been lodged against unknown persons. There is no cogent evidence against the applicant. The recovery, which has been shown from the possession of the applicant is planted one. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been place 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 27.9.2017. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.

¶7

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

¶8

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.

¶9

Let the applicant Ajay Singh @ Ajju involved in

¶10

Case Crime No. 222 of 2017, under Sections 395 and 201 I.P.C., Police Station Ahirauli Bazar, District Kushinagar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond (of rupees two lakhs) with two sureties (one should be of family member) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶11

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

¶12

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 19.1.2018

¶16

Sumaira

Ajay Singh @ Ajju v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Singh @ Ajju 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manpal Vs State of U.P.

Sarita Vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Vs State of U.P.

Sharif and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Maan Vs State of U.P.

Jugal Kishor Ahirwar and Another Vs State of U.P.