Allowed

Rajnish Lodh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Allahabad HC3 Jun 2022/5693/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal matter involving offences under IPC, relying on the parity of bail granted to co-accused by this Court. Bail was subject to conditions preventing misuse of liberty and ensuring attendance.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned.

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

¶1

Court No. - 12

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5693 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rajnish Lodh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Sharma,Prabhu Sharan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

2. The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by the applicant in FIR No87 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 143, 307, 427, 504, 506 IPC, 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Ganga Ghat, District Unnao.

¶7

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused, having similar role, have been granted bail by this Court in Bail Nos.5817 of 2021, 5984 of 2021, 4376 of 2022 vide orders dated 14.6.2021, 23.7.2021 and 5.5.2022. He, therefore, submits that the accused-applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has no previous criminal history.

¶8

4. Learned AGA does not dispute the aforesaid fact.

¶9

5 . Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the coaccused has been enlarged on bail from this Court, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶10

6. Let applicant Rajnish Lodh be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :-

¶11

(i) 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.

¶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

¶14

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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

Order Date :- 3.6.2022 prateek

¶17

Digitally signed by PRATEEK ARORA Date: 2022.06.03 18:00:27 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rajnish Lodh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajnish Lodh 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

Fuzail Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Mohit Singh @ Mukteshwar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Yogendra Kumar Yaday Vs State of U.P. and Others

Smt. Pushpawati and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Manish Kumar @ Vivek Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Matafer Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin Civil Secy and Another