Allowed

Ajay Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2019BAIL/27724/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under Sections 392 and 411 IPC, the High Court observed that though the applicant alleged false implication and lack of recovery evidence, he was entitled to bail. The court granted bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, attendance at trials, and no tampering with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties.

Ajay Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27724 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ajay Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sumit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 62 of 2019, under Sections 392 and 411 I.P.C., P.S. Pharenda, district-Maharajganj, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was not named in the first information report. He is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some ulterior motive. The alleged recovery of Rs. 10,300/which has been shown from the applicant's possession is false one. There is no public witness of the alleged recovery. No identification parade was conducted to ascertain the real culprit. Further submission is that the other co-accused whose role was identical to the present accused has already been granted bail by this Court by order dated 5.7.2019, copy of the bail order produced by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶8

He lastly submitted that the applicant has no criminal history. He has placed reliance in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018(3) SCC 22. Applicant is languishing in jail since 19.4.2019 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned

¶10

A.G.A.

¶11

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.

¶12

Let the applicant, Ajay Yadav be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in Case Crime No. 62 of 2019, under Sections 392 and 411 I.P.C., P.S. Pharenda, district-Maharajganj subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶14

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶15

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶16

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶18

Order Date :- 18.7.2019 Faridul

Ajay Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay 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

Dauji Vs State of U.P.

Dushyant Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Rishabh Singh @ Akshay Singh Vs State of U.P.

Surya Narayan Singh @ Petiraja Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Shippu Rai @ Nitesh Rai Vs State of U.P.