Allowed

Rajendra Prasad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Feb 2021BAIL/5005/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant for parity with a co-accused released earlier. Bail was granted on surety and personal bond subject to strict conditions regarding attendance, tampering with evidence, and appearances for specific procedural milestones.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties of the like amount subject to specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5005 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Rajendra Prasad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gyanendra Kumar,Babu Lal Ram 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. 368 of 2020, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34, 504, 506, 406 IPC, Police Station Cantt., District Varanasi.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the case of applicant is as par with the co-accused Dharmendra Kumar has been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.11.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41004 of 2020, 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 five criminal history of the applicant which have been explained in paragraph 20 of the affidavit and he is languishing in jail since 11.4.2020.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact that coaccused has 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 Dharmendra Kumar on bail, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Rajendra Prasad involved in aforesaid case crime be released 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 :-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not

¶11

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 :- 3.2.2021 Israr

Rajendra Prasad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Prasad 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ehtisham @ Ehtisham Khan Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Vs State of U.P.

Akshay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Bajpayee Vs State of U.P.

Brajesh Rajpoot Vs State of U.P.

Imran Vs State of U.P.