Allowed

Rajesh Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Sept 2021BAIL/24739/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application, the High Court granted release to the applicant charged with theft and criminal breach of trust. The court noted jail overcrowding and the applicant’s lack of criminal history, directing the trial court to conclude the trial within six months subject to standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties, one of whom must be a family member; trial concluded within six months.

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

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24739 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Rajesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Singh,Raj Kiran Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA, appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to enmity. It is next contended that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant, neither in the first information report has been mentioned that the explanation of the note's which has been stolen from the ATM it was 2000, 500, 200 or 100, so that the recovered money can be matched with the money which has been looted in the ATM which also shows the false implication of the applicant in the present case and malafide intention of the present case. 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 has 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. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 25.04.2021. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶8

Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶9

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶10

Let applicant- Rajesh Yadav , be released on bail in Case Crime No. 237 of 2021, under Sections- 379, 411 IPC, Police Station- Shivpur, DistrictVaranasi, on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (One should be of a family member) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶11

The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending

¶12

before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶13

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶14

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶15

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶19

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

¶20

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶21

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

Order Date :- 20.9.2021 Arti

Rajesh Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Yadav 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Firoz Shamshad Khan Vs State of U.P.

Gulam Nabi Vs State of U.P.

Mustkeem Taumar Vs State of U.P.

Roshan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rashid Vs State of U.P.

Omkar Vs State of U.P. and Another