Allowed

Rishab Saini v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC27 May 2022/3637/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a bail application filed by Rishab Saini in Case Crime No. 0095 of 2022. The applicant, having no criminal history, sought bail citing parity with a co-accused who was already enlarged on bail. The Court, without expressing opinion on merits, granted bail subject to strict conditions regarding trial attendance.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and strict conditions regarding trial attendance and consequences for misuse.

Rishab Saini Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 28

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3637 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rishab Saini Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Prabhaat Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0095 of 2022, U/S 394, 411, 34 IPC, Police Station Sushant Golf City, District Lucknow, during the pendency of trial.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Satyendra Yadav, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 12.5.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4591 of 2022. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.3.2022, having no criminal history. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

¶8

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of the parity to the co-accused has not been disputed by him.

¶9

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail on the ground of parity.

¶10

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Rishab Saini, who is involved in aforementioned case crime number 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.

¶11

(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

¶12

abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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 him in accordance with law.

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 27.5.2022 Shalini

¶19

Digitally signed by SHALINI JAISWAL Date: 2022.05.30 13:20:30 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rishab Saini v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishab Saini v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Jitendra Dubey Vs State of U.P.

Shubham @ Lala Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lko.

Chaman Lal Diwakar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Nitish Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Siraj @ Hasim and Another Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lko.

Om Vishwakarma (Second Bail) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko