Allowed

Ajeet Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Feb 2021BAIL/3641/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application filed by Ajeet Singh under Sections 418, 420, 365, 406, and 386 IPC. The court granted bail based on the principle of parity with co-accused who had already been released, subject to standard conditions during the trial.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Ajeet Singh released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of a like amount.

Ajeet Singh Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3641 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ajeet Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Prakash Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available 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.204 of 2020, under Sections 418, 420, 365, 406, 386 I.P.C., Police Station Bara, District Prayagraj.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that six named persons in the FIR abducted to the father of the informant and obtained a sale deed executed by him on 26.9.2020 of plot no.52. He further submits that applicant is not named in the FIR. As per statement of the victim, applicant and co-accused Prem Chandra Singh abducted him and after getting sale deed executed they took the consideration money from him. He further submits that co-accused Prem Chandra Singh has been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.9306 of 2020, vide order dated 16.12.2020. He further submits that co-accused Santosh Kumar Kesarwani and others have already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.15922 of 2020, vide order dated 7.1.2021. Applicant's case is at par with coaccused released on bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 9.10.2020.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail, but does not dispute the factual aspects of the matter.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, anticipatory bail granted to the co-accused having similar role as well as arrest of the other co-accused, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant Ajeet Singh involved in the 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

¶10

the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶11

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence and pressurize the witnesses during trial.

¶12

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

¶13

(iii) 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.

¶14

(iv) 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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(v) 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.

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 9.2.2021

¶19

m.a.

Ajeet Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajeet Singh 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

Jay Shankar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Mishra @ Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Mishra @ Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Karan Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Fida Husain Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.