Allowed

Rajesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Feb 2019BAIL/8290/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail to the applicant, Rajesh, who had previously defaulted on bail and been arrested. Despite the opposite party's concern about his habitual jumping of bail, the court found it a fit case for bail subject to strict conditions and heavy sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail in S.T. No.139 of 2013, furnishing personal bond and two heavy sureties, subject to conditions regarding attendance and conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8290 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Rajesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamal Singh 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 applicant was on bail vide order dated 16.12.2013 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.38149 of 2013, copy filed at Annexure-2; that during trial applicant could not appear before court due to some unavoidable reasons and learned trial court after cancelling his bail issued non bailable warrants on 29.9.2017 and he was taken into custody on 5.12.2017; that applicant undertakes that he will not commit mistake in future and will remain present on each and every date; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 5.12.2017.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and contended that applicant is habitual of jumping bail and previously due to his deliberate absence non bailable warrants were issued against him on 21.8.2014 and after issuance of process under Section 82, Cr.P.C. he was taken into custody on 17.2.2016. When he was released on bail, he again made default and on issuance of non bailable warrants dated 29.9.2017 he was arrested on 5.12.2017; that applicant, if released on bail, shall again abscond and delay and defraud disposal of fair trial.

¶8

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment 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 Rajesh be released on bail in S.T. No.139 of 2013, Case Crime No. 968 of 2011, under Sections 306, 363, 366, I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Kalpi, District

¶10

Jalalun, on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶11

(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.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

Order Date :- 27.2.2019 T. Sinha

Rajesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh 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

Pushpendra Vs State of U.P.

Shivraj Vs State of U.P.

Smt Premabai Vs State of U.P.

Shani Kumar Kardam Vs State of U.P.

Vimla Devi Vs State of U.P.

Ramji Chaubey Vs State of U.P.