Allowed

Deendayal Keshari v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Nov 2020BAIL/37078/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Allahabad granted bail to Deendayal Keshari in Case Crime No.233 of 2020, wherein he was implicated for supplying a fake SIM card to a co-accused in a robbery case, subject to specific conditions including furnishing sureties and non-interference with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to five specified conditions regarding court functioning status.

Deendayal Keshari Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37078 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Deendayal Keshari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandan Singh,Manvendra Nath Singh

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Deendayal Keshari, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.233 of 2020, under Sections 392, 411, 413, 414, 216, 120-B IPC, Police Station Nonhara, District- Ghazipur, during pendency of trial.

¶8

There is allegation against unknown persons regarding robbery of a car.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He was not named in the FIR. Subsequently, the vehicle has been recovered from co-accused, Arvind. The applicant is alleged to have supplied the fake SIM card to co-accused, Arvind. The aforesaid SIM card is alleged to use in booking of car. The applicant had no prior criminal history to his credit and he has been subsequently implicated in one case. He is in jail since 27.8.2020.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.

¶11

Having considered the material on record, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant 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 that :-

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his bail shall be effective after the period of short term bail comes to an end.

¶16

The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored. In case court below is functioning normally, this condition will not apply and applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of bail bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court below.

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 3.11.2020 Ruchi Agrahari

Deendayal Keshari v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deendayal Keshari 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brij Pal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Asfaq Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Prasad Vs State of U.P.

Arjun Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Dharikar Vs State of U.P.