Allowed

Om Prakash @ Jay Prakash @ Rasedar and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2019BAIL/51373/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under sections 498A, 302, and 201 IPC, the court granted bail to the applicants with stringent conditions to prevent tampering with evidence, seeking adjournments, and absence during trial proceedings, directing the trial court to enforce specific provisions to secure presence.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail with personal bonds and two sureties, subject to strict conditions regarding witness tampering, adjournments, and presence in court.

Om Prakash @ Jay Prakash @ Rasedar and Another Vs State of… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51373 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Om Prakash @ Jay Prakash @ Rasedar And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rang Raj Giri,Jyoti Giri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Vikas Sahai, the learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicants in case crime No.175 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 302, 201 I.P.C., Police Station Machhalishahar, District- Jaunpur with the prayer to enlarge them on bail.

¶7

For the purposes of evaluating the prayer for bail, the Court notes the statement of the eye witness Ashish Giri the son of the deceased who has alleged that it was the father who had set his mother ablaze and which ultimately led to her death. Against the applicant no.2, all that is alleged is that while the father was taking the deceased in a car, she was seen sitting at the Mandir but did not assist. The applicant no.1 is placed in the house at the time when the husband was taking the body of the deceased for cremation. The applicants are otherwise stated to have no criminal history. The Court takes further note of the fact that the investigation has concluded and a chargesheet submitted. It has next been submitted that in case the applicants are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicants but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions noticed above, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Let the applicants Om Prakash @ Jay Prakash @ Rasedar and Fuldei @ Rita Devi be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶11

(i) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶12

(ii) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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.

¶13

(iii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal

¶15

Code.

¶16

(v) The applicants 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 applicants 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 them in accordance with law.

¶17

Order Date :- 2.12.2019 Vivek Kr.

Om Prakash @ Jay Prakash @ Rasedar and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Prakash @ Jay Prakash @ Rasedar and Another 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

Ramesh Chandra Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Kumar Bind Vs State of U.P.

Ashok Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Lalit Kumar Pandey Alias Yuvraj Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Pal Vs State of U.P.

Shobi @ Azam Vs State of U.P.