Allowed

Rajesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2021BAIL/3438/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court court granted bail to Rajesh in a criminal case involving forgery and cheating. Relying on parity with co-accused already released, the court imposed standard conditions including personal bond, sureties, and strict adherence to trial dates with penalties for tampering or default.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two local sureties, subject to conditions regarding attendance, non-tampering with evidence, and prosecution witnesses.

Rajesh Vs State of U.P. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3438 of 2021

¶2

Applicant :- Rajesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Mohd Taqi Abdi,Syed Ahmed Faizan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶3

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

¶4

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.743 of 2020, under Sections 411, 413, 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 IPC, Police Station Qwarsi, District Aligarh.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that 13 named and 3 unnamed co-accused persons were named in the first information report. He further submits that submits that the case of the applicant is at par with the co-accused Pravesh @ Sethi @ Lala, Hasrat Ali @ Hasmat Ali, Arif, Mazid, Mahesh, Salman, Allanoor, Anoop Kumar, Anil, Vijendra @ Pappu and Shamim, who have been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 18.11.2020, 06.01.202110.11.2020, 26.11.2020, 24.11.2020, 07.12.2020, 18.12.2020, 18.12.2020, 15.12.2020, 07.01.2021 and 05.01.2021 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.39934 of 2020, 36366 of 2020, 39034 of 2020, 40692 of 2020, 41112 of 2020, 42119 of 2020, 42128 of 2020, 45171 of 2020, 44918 of 2020, 48348 of 2020 and 49837 of 2020, respectively, therefore, the applicant is entitled for bail on the ground of parity. 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 criminal history of one case against the applicant, which has been explained at Para 7 of the affidavit and he is languishing in jail since 27.08.2020.

¶6

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact that coaccused have already been released on bail.

¶7

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, enlargement of co-accused on bail and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of

¶8

the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Rajesh involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his/her 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 :-

¶9

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

¶10

(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.

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 19.1.2021/Zafar

Rajesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh 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

Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Rinku Yadav @ Harbeer Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Shailesh Yadav @ Monu Vs State of U.P.

Ansho Devi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.