Allowed

Bharat Kumar Rai v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Apr 2018BAIL/42782/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Special Public Prosecutor opposed bail. The Court granted bail to the applicant involved in a cheating case without expressing an opinion on merits, citing reasonable apprehension of witness tampering, subject to strict conditions to ensure court presence.

What did the court decide?

The applicant, Bharat Kumar Rai, was released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with strict conditions regarding court attendance.

Bharat Kumar Rai Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 23

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42782 of 2017

¶3

Applicant :- Bharat Kumar Rai Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mangla Prasad Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manish,Santosh K Rai

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Rekha Dikshit,J.

¶5

Rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Shri Mangla Prasad Rai, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that accused applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. The accused-applicant is languishing in jail since 21.4.2017. 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.

¶8

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.

¶9

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.

¶10

Let the applicant, Bharat Kumar Rai, involved in Case Crime No.398 of 2016, under Sections 419 and 420 IPC, Police Station - Kotwali, District - Ghazipur, 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:-

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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

¶14

him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(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.

¶16

Order Date :- 13.4.2018 KR

Bharat Kumar Rai v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharat Kumar Rai 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

Subhash Vs State of U.P.

Smt Shabana Vs State of U.P.

Dharam Pal Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Lokendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Dau Ji Vs State of U.P.

Dau Ji Vs State of U.P.