Allowed

Amar Rathi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2021BAIL/24868/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a theft case involving recovery of a motorcycle. The court imposed standard conditions regarding cooperation with the trial, presence at hearings, and non-interference with evidence or witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on a personal bond and two local sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding presence, cooperation, and non-interference.

Amar Rathi Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24868 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Amar Rathi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Dhama

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.33 of 2021, under Sections 392 and 411 I.P.C., P.S. Kandhla, District Shamli.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per F.I.R. version on 29.01.2021, Rs.10,000, a mobile phone and a motorcycle no.U.P. 12 P 8088 were looted by four miscreants. He further submits that on 24.03.2021 applicant and two others were arrested by the police and the alleged motorcycle was recovered. He further submits that on the basis of recovery of the motorcycle applicant and others have been implicated in the present case. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant and is languishing in jail since 28.03.2021.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the factual aspects.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence and recovery of the motorcycle near about after two months, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Amar Rathi involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he

¶11

will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) 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 absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶15

Order Date :- 2.8.2021 Jitendra

¶16

Digitally signed by Justice Ali Zamin Date: 2021.08.03 17:33:29 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amar Rathi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amar Rathi 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naved Vs State of U.P.

Bablu Vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Ravindra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Mithun Alias Shivam Sankhwar Vs State of U.P.

Anwar Vs State of U.P.

Satendra Yadav Vs State of U.P.