Criminal Misc. Bail Application wherein the court granted bail to the applicant charged under Sections 420, 411 IPC and Section 66 IT Act, holding the applicant entitled to release despite opposition from the State.
Release of applicant on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of attendance and non-interference with witnesses.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 23
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5318 of 2018
Applicant :- Umesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Sanjay Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Purshottam Maurya, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
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 and the FIR has been lodged against unknown persons. Subsequently during the course of investigation the police arrested the applicant and false recovery of Rs.16,000/- has been shown against him,which belonged to the applicant. The said fact has been mentioned in paragraph 8 of the affidavit accompanying the bail application.It is also contended that there is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. It is next contended that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. It is also submitted that the co-accused Shivam Singh has already been released on bail by this court on 9.1.2018; copy of which is annexed as annexure no.4 on page 37 of the bail application. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed 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 25.11.2017.The applicant has no other reported criminal history except two cases as mentioned in paragraph 8 of the ;affiavit, which has been explained properly..
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
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.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Umesh Yadav involved in Case Crime No.659 of 2017, under Sections 420, 411 I.P.C. & sec.66 I.T.Act, Police Station Kokhraj, District Kaushambi 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:-
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 13.2.2018 IA
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail given the allegations of false implication and recovery.
Whether reasonable apprehension of tempering with witnesses bars the grant of bail in this case.
Umesh Yadav
State Of U.P.
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
