Allowed

Ajay v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Jan 2021BAIL/47810/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 47810 of 2020, the High Court granted bail to applicant Ajay involved in snatching under Sections 392, 411 IPC. Bail was allowed based on parity of treatment with granted co-accused, subject to furnishing bond and stringent conditions regarding presence and tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Ajay on bail subject to personal bond, two local sureties, and conditions regarding attendance and witness tampering.

Ajay Vs State of U.P. — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47810 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Ajay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Kumar Tripathi 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 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. 161 of 2017 (S.S.T. No. 09 of 2018), under Sections 392, 411 IPC, Police Station Achhnera, District Agra.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the FIR on 7th March, 2017 a bag having Rs. 95,843/-, identity card and micromax mobile were snatched by three unknown persons. He submits that applicant is not named in the FIR. He further submits that after two and half months of the incident applicant and two other co-accused were arrested by the police. The co-accused Chand Khan and Mungeri have already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 30.11.2017 & 13.02.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 46768 of 2017 & 6225 of 2019, 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 are five criminal history of the applicant which has been explained in paragraph15 of the affidavit and he is languishing in jail since 24.05.2017.

¶8

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.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, enlargement of co-accused Chand Khan and Mungeri on bail, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Ajay involved in aforesaid case crime be released

¶10

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 :-

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 12.1.2021 Israr

Ajay v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay 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

Shatru Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Jabir Vs State of U.P.

Safikul Hassan @ Guddu Vs State of U.P.

Usman Ali Vs State of U.P.

Sonia Bhardwaj Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Gill Vs State of U.P.