Allowed

Amardeep v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC11 Jul 2022/6343/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a treason case involving cheating and IT Act offenses, emphasizing parity with similarly situated co-accuses already released on bail by this Court. This order imposes strict conditions ensuring attendance for all trial stages.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to six specific conditions including strict attendance for evidence, charges, and trial proceedings.

Amardeep Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6343 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Amardeep Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Nasreen Bano,Diwakar Goyal,Hanumant Lal Srivastava,Manoj Gupta,Sushil Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sushil Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Mamta Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.130 of 2022, U/S 420 IPC, Section 9 of UP Public Examination Act and Section 66-D of I.T. Act, Police Station Maha Nagar, District Lucknow, during the pendency of trial.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Shivam Baliyan and Shivam Kumar, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 7.7.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 6264 of 2022 and 6303 of 2022, respectively. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.5.2022, 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 aspects of parity to the co-accused and of no criminal history against the applicant, have 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- Amardeep, who is involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in

¶11

the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

(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 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 :- 11.7.2022

¶19

Siddhant

¶20

Digitally signed by SIDDHANT SAHU Date: 2022.07.12 10:21:26 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Amardeep v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amardeep 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arvind Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru.Sit,Gomti Nagar Lko.

Santosh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Suresh Srivastav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Cbi/ Acb/ Lko.

Rizwan and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rajesh Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrtt. Lko and Another

Arjun Goswami Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.