Allowed

Rajju v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Jun 2021BAIL/16613/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court released the applicant on bail in a criminal miscellaneous application involving offences under IPC Sections 147, 148, 304, 308, 504, 506, and 324, imposing conditions for personal bond and sureties subject to pandemic restrictions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail upon executing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding evidence tampering and criminal activity.

Rajju Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 65

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16613 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Rajju Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A and gone through the record..

¶6

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accusedapplicant-Rajju, who is involved in case crime no. 56 of 2020 under Sections 147, 148, 304, 308, 504, 506, 324 I.P.C., Police Station- Kamasin, District- Banda.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case; that the role of causing injury by lathi has been assigned to the present applicant. Co-accused Ashish, Somnath, Shantan and Kallu Tripathi having similar role have been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 4265 of 2021, 5217 of 2021, 45017 of 2020 and 44877 of 2020 on 27.1.2021, 17.2.2021, 15.12.2020 and 8.12.2020 and, therefore, learned counsel for the applicant claimed parity. Pleading false implication it is lastly contended that the accused applicant is languishing in jail since 3.7.2020 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail. However, granting bail to co-accused persons has not been disputed.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without touching the merits of the case, the accused applicant is entitled for bail.

¶10

Let the above mentioned applicant involved in 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 :-

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence,

¶12

shall cooperate in the investigation or trial and will not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶13

In case of breach of any of the conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶14

However, if due to Covind-19 pandemic, the Sub-ordinate Court is under lockdown, 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.

¶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

It is made clear that in the event the Sub-ordinate Court is functional as usual then the normal procedure/ mode of filing bail bonds and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned will be adopted.

¶18

Order Date :- 16.6.2021 Anuj Singh

Rajju v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajju 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

Masroor Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Umesh Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Ahirwar Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Vs State Of U.P.