Allowed

Jaykesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Jun 2018BAIL/23435/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that the applicant entitled to bail stating that the case requires no detailed examination on merits though reasonable apprehension of tempering of witnesses exists. Applicant granted bail subject to bond and conditions prohibiting adjournment.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Jaykesh on bail by furnishing personal bond with two sureties subject to specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23435 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Jaykesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pratibha Singh,Ashok Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

It has been argued that the applicant is the husband of the deceased and was enlarged on bail under section 498A IPC by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the year 1999 only but during the course of trial, sections 304B and 201 IPC were also added at the instance of the prosecution. The brother in law (jeth) and mother-in-law of the deceased have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 22.05.2018 and 25.6.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19174 of 2018 and 23306 of 2018, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is in jail since 2.5.2018.

¶7

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.

¶8

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.

¶9

Let the applicant Jaykesh involved in Case Crime No. 201 of 1999 (Criminal Case No. 1557 of 2018) under Section 304B, 201 IPC, Police Station Shadiyabad, District Ghazipur 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:-

¶10

(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.

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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

¶13

Code.

¶14

(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.

¶15

Order Date :- 26.6.2018 Shiraz

Jaykesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaykesh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Sahu Vs State of Up

Haidar Vs State of U.P.

Pappu Gurjar Vs State of Up

Omveer Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Vs State of U.P.