Allowed

Manish Pathak v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Jun 2020BAIL/13691/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Allahabad granted bail to Manish Pathak in a robbery case under sections 394 IPC. The applicant was not named in the FIR and was a first-time offender. Bail was granted on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties with strict conditions to prevent tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties with conditions to cooperate with the trial and not tamper with evidence.

Manish Pathak Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 43

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13691 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Manish Pathak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amaresh Yadava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 44 of 2019, under Sections 394 I.P.C., P.S. Gambhirpur, District Azamgarh.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is not named in the FIR. According to prosecution, three persons came at the Ojasvi Filling Station situated at village Nandaon, District Azamgarh at 15.10 P.M. on 10.03.2019 and looted Rs. 4836/- and Rs. 34,284/- from the salesman Saklain and Saroj respectively and also beaten them. He further submits that coaccused Digvijay Singh @ Bholu Singh and Deepak Tiwari @ Arpit Tiwari were released on bail in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.24544 of 2019 (Digvijay Singh @ Bholu Singh Vs. State of U.P. ) vide order dated 19.06.2020 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 27707 of 2019 (Deepak Tiwari @ Arpit Tiwari Vs. State of U.P.) vide order dated 11.07.2019 respectively. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there is no criminal history of the applicant and he is languishing in jail since 20.03.2019.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submitted that the applicant has committed the alleged offence, therefore he is not entitled for bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Manish Pathak involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court

¶10

concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) The applicant 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 applicant 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 him in accordance with law.

¶15

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶16

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 24.6.2020 MAA/-

Manish Pathak v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Pathak 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

Dharmendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Achhey Vs State of U.P.

Ashutosh Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Ashar Vs State of U.P.

Vineet Kumar Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Singh Vs State of U.P.