Allowed

Jaipal Prajapati v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 May 2019BAIL/5895/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application under Criminal Misc. BA No. 5895 of 2019 involving the applicant charged with offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 66, 67 of the IT Act. The court treated it as a fit case for bail subject to furnishing bonds and specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties under specified conditions regarding evidence tampering, trial cooperation, and criminal activities.

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

¶1

Court No. - 22

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5895 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Jaipal Prajapati Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Pandey,Atul Kumar Shahi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This bail application has been preferred by the accusedapplicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 411 of 2018 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and under Section 66 and 67 of Information Technology (Amendments) Act-2008, Police Station Nichlaul, District Maharajganj.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is not named in the F.I.R. For the first time, applicant's name came into picture in the statements of Brajesh Kumar and Ashish Kumar wherein the applicant has been assigned only role of helping them in opening their Account Nos.37796640600 & 37888129275 respectively at Punjab National Bank. Applicant is innocent. He has no connection with any of the accused persons named in the F.I.R. or with the account holder. Role of the present applicant is distinguishable from the other accused persons. The applicant has no previous criminal history. He is in jail since 28.11.2018 and if he is granted liberty, he will not misuse the same.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant Jaipal Prajapati involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

He shall cooperate in the trial bonafidely without seeking adjournments.

¶13

He shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶15

Order Date :- 1.5.2019 Ram Murti

Jaipal Prajapati v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaipal Prajapati 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

Narendra Kumar Dubey Vs State of U.P.

Babu Jiya and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sarfaraj Vs State of U.P.

Mohan Vs State of U.P.

Hasan Khan Vs State of U.P.

Satveer Vs State of U.P.