Allowed

Ajay Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2019BAIL/31091/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 392 IPC, the court referred to Data Ram v. State of U.P. and released the applicant on personal bond and two sureties contingent upon attendance, non-interference with witnesses, and compliance with conditions regarding surety verification during a Magistrate-triable trial.

What did the court decide?

Order for release on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to attend trial and not interfere with witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31091 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ajay Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amarjeet Yadav 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. 22 of 2019, under Section 392 I.P.C., P.S. Nijamabad, district-Azamgarh, 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. His name as an accused in the present case surfaced for the first time in the confessional statement of Anil Singh. No incriminating article or material has been recovered either from the applicant or on his pointing out. He next submitted that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some ulterior motive. Further submission is that the offence is triable by Magistrate. He lastly submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 15.3.2019 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018(3)

¶10

SCC 22 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.

¶11

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. 22 of 2019, under Section 392 I.P.C., P.S. Nijamabad, district-Azamgarh subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

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

¶13

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 2.8.2019 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pooran Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Ravindra Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Shukla Vs State of U.P.

Kamlesh Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P.

Chhote @ Ravi @ Shyam Pratap Vs State of U.P.

Amit Khatik Vs State of U.P.