Allowed

Ambika Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Mar 2019BAIL/11098/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicant Ambika Yadav in a criminal miscellaneous bail application arising from an FIR lodged alleging assault resulting in death. Despite the severity of the charges involving serious offences under the IPC, noting the complicity of other accused and granting bail to co-accused, the court found it a fit case for bail subject to strict conditions regarding trial coop

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of personal attendance, no tampering with evidence, and no unlawful activities.

Ambika Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11098 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ambika Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant has been falsely implicated; that as per averments made in FIR lodged by Shambhu on 30.5.2018, applicant and co-accused persons came at his door and assaulted with weapons in their hand wherein co-accused Ramakant caused head injury to Chhotey Lal with iron rod resulting his death and upon catching hold of Mukuth Yadav by applicant, Raju caused injuries to him; that injury report of Mukhut Yadav does not show any grievous injury and all of five injuries have been found to be simple in nature; that applicant has been assigned only with the role of catching hold of injured Mukhut Yadav to whom injuries were caused by Raju, who has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 16.11.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.42342 of 2018 and co-accused Jagdamba has also been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 1.11.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.39890 of 2018, copies filed at Annexure-6; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 22.12.2018.

¶7

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

¶8

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, grant of bail to co-accused as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶9

Let the applicant Ambika Yadav be released on bail in Case Crime No. 46 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 427, 452, 325, 304, I.P.C., P.S. Barwapatti, District Kushinagar, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶10

(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.

¶11

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶12

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶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 :- 15.3.2019 T. Sinha

Ambika Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ambika 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gorakh Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Vinod Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Sabira Vs State of U.P.

Arman Ali Vs State of U.P.

Satya Pal Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Mangal Vs State of U.P.