Allowed

Mohd. Yameen Chaudhary v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Jan 2021ABAIL/1450/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge order allowed an anticipatory bail application. The applicant, already included in a criminal case under sections 420, 406, 504, and 506 IPC, was released on bail by issuing a personal bond with two sureties and adhering to specific conditions, including passport surrender and appearance requirements.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount of Rs. 4,50,000.

Mohd. Yameen Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1450 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Yameen Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Ali Imam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

By the order dated 20.10.2020, the applicant, Mohd. Yameen Chaudhary, was granted conditional anticipatory bail on the payment of Rs. 4,50,000/-.

¶6

Learned counsel for the informant submitted that the applicant has complied with the aforesaid order and payment has already been received by the informant.

¶7

In view of the above, this anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶8

Let the applicant, Mohd. Yameen Chaudhary, involved in Case Crime No. 959 of 2018 under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Sector 24, Noida, DistrictGautam Budh Nagar, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶9

The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶10

The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

¶11

That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶12

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶13

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶14

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, default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his 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.

¶17

Order Date :- 6.1.2021 KS

Mohd. Yameen Chaudhary v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Yameen Chaudhary v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jitendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Indrawati Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sant Lal and 7 Others Vs State of U.P.

Smt.Kanika Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P and Another

Arun Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manish Pachouri Vs State of U.P. and Another