Allowed

Pradeep Saxena v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2021BAIL/45613/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

SINGLE JUDGE GRANTED BAIL TO APPANT IN ACCUSATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 439 Cr.P.C. CONSTANTS SUBMITTED APPLICANT IS INNOENT, CO ACCUSED GRANTED BAIL, NO INDEPENDENT WITNESSES. COURT IMPOSED SAVY CONDITIONS INCLUDING PRESENCE IN COURT, AVOIDING ADJOURNMENTS, AND TRIAL COMPLETION WITHIN ONE YEAR.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of court attendance and trial compliance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45613 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Pradeep Saxena Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.372 of 2016, under sections 395, 397, 412 IPC, police station Izzatnagar, district Bareilly.

¶7

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that recovery of Rs. 12000/- each has been made from the possession of the applicant and coaccused Amit Kumar Gupta alias Pahadi. There is no independent witness of the incident. The applicant is in jail since 13.07.2016. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant has criminal history of four cases, which has been explained in paragraph 2 of the supplementary affidavit.

¶8

It is next submitted that co-accused Amit Kumar Gupta @ Pahadi, having similar role as that of applicant, has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 15.03.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11915 of 2021, therefore, applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.

¶9

I have perused the bail order of co accused and find that the role assigned to the present applicant is almost similar to that of co accused person who has already been enlarged on bail by this court.

¶10

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail.

¶11

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶12

Let the applicant-Pradeep Saxena, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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 IPC.

¶15

(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 IPC.

¶16

(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

¶17

such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Order Date :- 1.12.2021 Sazia

Pradeep Saxena v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep Saxena 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dwarika Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ubaish Khan and Another Vs State of U.P.

Mohan @ Mohana Vs State of U.P.

Bal Krishan @ Naam Vs State of U.P.

Wasim Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Naseer Vs State of U.P.