Criminal bail application filed by Om Prakash against serious charges. Single judge granted bail after observing it as a bail case, directing the trial court to expedite proceedings under acceleration guidelines.
Bail granted on personal bond with two sureties, subject to standard conditions including non-tampering with witnesses.
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. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3490 of 2021
Applicant :- Om Prakash @ Tyagi @ Yogi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pushkar Nath Tripathi,Jai Prakash Prasad
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Gunjan Sharma
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA-I 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. He is innocent and has no criminal antecedent. It is further submitted that first information report was lodged after about five days from the date of alleged incident without any plausible explanation. It is next contended that there are general allegations and a concocted and false story has been set up by the prosecution whereas the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged. 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 18.11.2020. 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.
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- Om Prakash alias Tyagi alias Yogi involved in Case Crime No. 231 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 354 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Ghazipur, District Fatehpur be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, 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.
In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
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 is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava Vs. Union of India and another, AIR 2018 SC 2440 , 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 :- 15.6.2021 Digamber
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Alakh Alok Srivastava Vs. Union of India and another, AIR 2018 SC 2440Referred¶16
Om Prakash
State of U.P.
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
