Allowed

Ashish Pathak v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.,Home Deptt.,Lko

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2022/306/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail application Ashish Pathak under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120B, 411 IPC, 66, 66C, 66D IT Act. Bail granted on parity with co-accused Mukesh Kumar, imposing multiple conditions to prevent tampering and ensure attendance.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount satisfying the court.

Ashish Pathak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.,Home… — Money Laundering | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 306 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ashish Pathak Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.,Home Deptt.,Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Dilip Mani,Rajeev Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The co-accused Mukesh Kumar who was assigned similar role has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 17.12.2021 (Annexure-4 to the bail application). Role of the present applicant is similar to that of the co-accused.

¶7

It is further submitted that from the applicant, Rs.250/- has been allegedly recovered. The said money belongs to the applicant. There is no public witness to the said recovery.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant claims parity with bail order of co-accused Mukesh Kumar.

¶9

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant, as also the ground of parity.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the fact that charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant has no criminal history, the co-accused Mukesh Kumar having similar role has been granted bail, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the applicant is in jail since 30.7.2021, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am prima facie satisfied that it is a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail and accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶12

Let the applicant Ashish Pathak, involved in Case Crime No.189/2021 under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120B and 411 I.P.C., sections 66, 66C, 66D I.T. Act, P.S. Mahanagar, district Lucknow, 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 with the

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(iv) 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.

¶18

(v) 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.

¶19

(vi) 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.

¶20

Observation(s) made herein above shall not be considered as an expression of opinion on merit of the case.

¶21

Order Date :- 18.1.2022 kkb/

Ashish Pathak v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.,Home Deptt.,Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish Pathak v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.,Home Deptt.,Lko

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

Anant Ram Vs State of U.P.

Sukhdev Singh Vs State of U.P.

Imran @ Man Vs State of U.P.

Bulande Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home

Rahmatullah @ Tullah Vs State of U.P.Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Jhamman Singh @ Dharmendra Singh Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow