Allowed

Pramod Yadav @ Rajnish v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2021BAIL/48534/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a case under Section 3(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti-Social Activities Act, imposing strict conditions to ensure trial progression despite normal court functioning disruptions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on a personal bond without sureties until normal court functioning is restored, with sureties to be furnished within a month thereafter.

Pramod Yadav @ Rajnish Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48534 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Pramod Yadav @ Rajnish Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raghvendra Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Raghvendra Prakash, learned counsel for the applicant through virtual mode, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no. 153/2020, under Sections 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, IPC, P.S. Devgaon, District- Azamgarh is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his application for bail submits that the applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that the gang chart shows a solitary case against the applicant in which he has already been bailed out. The learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that in paragraph no. 3 of supplementary affidavit it has been mentioned that in two cases out of three, the applicant has been bailed out and the third case is an appeal u/s 14(1) of the SC/ST Act which is pending in this Court. It has lastly been submitted that the applicant is in jail since 19.09.2020.

¶8

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the present bail application and pointed out that in addition to one case shown in the gang chart, three other cases are against the applicant which are explained in paragraph no. 3 of Supplementary affidavit. In all the remaining three cases the Court is not inclined to accept this way of poisoning the judicial mind of the Court in the light of judgment of this Court in the case of Nishant @ Nishu Vs. State of U.P. decided on 19.03.2021.

¶9

The submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, prima facie, quite appealing and convincing for the purpose of bail only.

¶10

Keeping in view the totality of circumstances that in the gang chart a solitary case is shown against the applicant in which he has been bailed out and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant Pramod Yadav @ Rajnish, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned

¶12

with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE 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/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶15

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, 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 SUCH DEFAULT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PROCEED AGAINST THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶21

The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The

¶22

accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶23

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

¶24

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶25

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.

¶26

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.

¶27

Order Date :- 5.7.2021

¶28

Nisha

Pramod Yadav @ Rajnish v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Yadav @ Rajnish 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

Danveer Vs State of U.P.

Kashish Vs State of U.P.

Amit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Kumari Vs State of Up

Dharmendra@ Patariya Vs State of U.P.

Sahid and Another Vs State of U.P.