Allowed

Raja Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Feb 2021BAIL/3066/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to Raja Yadav, accused of culpable homicide and rioting. Noting the unattributed fatal injury and lack of criminal antecedents, the court allowed bail on personal bond (without sureties during court disruption) subject to specific trial presence and freedom conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Raja Yadav released on bail on personal bond subject to strict conditions including presence in court, prohibition on adjournments during evidence, and digital verification of the order.

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

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3066 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Raja Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kashi Nath Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bhoodev Yadav,Pradeep Yadav,Varun Dev Sharma

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Kashi Nath Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pradeep Yadav, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 305 of 2020, under Sections 304, 308, 323 I.P.C., Police Station- Mohammadabad, District- Ghazipur is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial. The applicant is in jail since 18.9.2020.

¶7

Contention raised by learned counsel for the applicant is that three accused persons are said to have been named in the F.I.R. for the commission of offence attributing a general role of assault by their respective lathi-danda upon the deceased, Manoj Yadav. The postmortem report reveals that the deceased, Manoj Yadav has sustained five injuries over his person and one out of which is on forehead which turned to be fatal one. It is not clear as to who is the author of the fatal injury. There is alleged recovery of lathi-danda from the possession of the applicant. The weapon used in the commission of offence is a household weapon in every house and it could not be said that the alleged recovered lathi-danda is used in the commission of offence. Therefore, the applicant, having no criminal antecedent to his credit, deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant- Raja Yadav , who is involved in Case Crime No. 305 of 2020, under Sections 304, 308, 323 I.P.C., Police

¶11

Station- Mohammadabad, District- Ghazipur, 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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.

¶13

(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 I.P.C.

¶14

(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., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF 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 I.P.C.

¶15

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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.

¶16

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶17

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

¶18

Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶19

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.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

Order Date :- 2.2.2021 Vikas

Raja Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Maitun Nisha Vs State of U.P.

Radha Devi and Another Vs State of U.P.

Parmanand Mourya Vs State of U.P.

Jay Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Sukhlal Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Bhuri Devi Vs State of U.P.