Single Judge granted bail to an applicant charged under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC. The court imposed conditions including personal bond, sureties, and prohibitions on tampering with witnesses or engaging in illegal activities.
Applicant released on personal bond and two sureties of Rs. Two Lakh each subject to specific conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34746 of 2021
Applicant :- Durga Prasad Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vineet Kumar Yadav,Saroj Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the applicant is an employee of Indian Railways and the allegations levelled against him are vague and frivolous. No such credible evidence has been shown by the informant to establish the applicant's involvement in any kind of alleged illegal activities. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is a Government Servant and he gave Rs. 5 Lakh to the informant on his assurance of returning it within specified time, however, Rs. 2,38,500/- is still due with the informant and to evade the payment, he has falsely implicated the applicant in the present case. The applicant has properly explained the history of one criminal case in paragraph-19 of the affidavit. 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 have 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. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.6.2021. He undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted, therefore, he may be released on bail.
Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party vehemently opposed the prayer.
Courts have taken notice of 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.
Having heard submissions of learned counsel of both sides, considering nature of accusation, severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 , without expressing any view on the merits of the
case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let the applicant- Durga Prasad Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 33 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Gambhirpur, District Azamgarh be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two sureties of Rs. Two Lakh each (one should be of a family member), with the following conditions:
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.
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. The Trial Court shall take endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of production of a copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
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.
Order Date :- 9.9.2021 Digamber
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant should be released on bail despite serious charges and pending trial.
Whether the grounds of false implication and lack of credible evidence support granting bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶9
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Durga Prasad Yadav
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
