Allowed

Yogesh v. State of Up

Allahabad HC15 Dec 2020BAIL/36431/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant accused in a criminal case involving property dispute, affluence assault, and sexual molestation allegations. The Court considered parity with co-accused and the nature of evidence before releasing him on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by executing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount on standard conditions.

Yogesh Vs State of Up — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 93

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36431 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Yogesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjeev Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vikas Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Sanjeev Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Shri Swarnjit Singh holding brief of Sri Vikas Srivastava, learned counsel for informant and perused the entire record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 399 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 323, 324, 325, 504, 506, 307, 376D, 392, 188, 269, 270 IPC, and 3 Pandemic Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District-Etah with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶7

The report of this incident was lodged by the complainant with the concerned police station about accused persons on the allegation that the accused persons were trying to take possession of a disputed plot for which litigation was pending between the complainant side and accused side. It is further alleged in the first information report that when the accused side came to take possession of the disputed plot, mar-pit ensued between the complainant side and accused side and it was also alleged in the First Information Report that the sister of the complainant was sexually molested by accused Jitendra and Ansuman.

¶8

The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that false allegation has been levelled upon the accused persons including the present applicant that when they had gone to take possession over the plot which was claimed to be disputed by the complainant side, the present accused was present there and the applicant was assigned the role of exhortation and snatching chain of the complainant as is evident from F.I.R.. It is also submitted that SSP, Etah has sent a police report to the Government about the mar-pit

¶9

between the complainant side and accused side and it is stated therein that this incident of mar-pit took place when the accused side was trying to unload the sand of the River Chambal. In case, applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that coaccused Sukhvendra and Dharmendra have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 1.12.2020 and 9.12.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.37319 of 2020 and 35258 of 2020, a copy of the orders placed before the Court. Submission is that the case of the applicant is not on worse footing than that of coaccused who have already been released on bail, and therefore, on principles of parity also the applicant should be released on bail.

¶11

Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It has also been pointed out that the accused is not having any criminal history and he is in jail since 12.5.2020 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶13

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶14

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant Yogesh involved in Case Crime No. 399 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 323, 324, 325, 504, 506, 307, 376D, 392, 188, 269, 270 of IPC, and 3 Pandemic Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District-Etah be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-

¶16

(1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

(2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the court below and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.

¶18

(3) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶19

(4) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶20

(5)The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.

¶21

(6) 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

¶22

It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.

¶23

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶24

Order Date :- 15.12.2020 SFH

Yogesh v. State of Up

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogesh v. State of Up

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

Dr. Swamideen Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashish Rajpoot @ Babloo Vs State of U.P. and Another

Surendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Bahadur (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Ram Singh Vs State of Up and Another

Asif Khan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another