Allowed

Suraj Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Sept 2018BAIL/25849/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal bail application was heard by the Hon'ble Court, which referred to a Supreme Court bench decision and granted bail to the applicant on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Suraj Yadav released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties of Rs. one lac each. Standard conditions applied regarding cooperation, non-tampering, and no unlawful activities.

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

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25849 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Suraj Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Awadhesh Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of informant in the Court today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Awadhesh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence but the police only to increase the gravity of offence has implicated the applicant in the present case. No recovery has been made either from the applicant or on his pointing out. The recovery which is said to have been made from the applicant was planted by the police on the instructions of the persons having ulterior motive. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. Further submission is that applicant who is in jail since 24.5.2018 has no other criminal history and there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant also undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.

¶8

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

¶9

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any view on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶10

Let the applicant Suraj Yadav be released on bail in Case Crime No. 39 of 2018, under Section 60 of Excise Act, Sections 272 and 273 I.P.C., P.S. Khejuri, district-Ballia on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of Rs. one lac each (one should be of his family member) in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶11

(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release. (ii) The applicant

¶12

will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶14

Order Date :- 14.9.2018 Faridul

Suraj Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj 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

Radheyshyam Vs State of U.P.

Nazeer Ahmad Alias Raju Vs State of U.P.

Gopal Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Jonny @ Aditya Vs State of U.P.

Irfan Vs State of U.P.

Ashok Yadav Vs State of U.P.