Allowed

Saurabh Yadav @ Nirmal Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC15 Nov 2022/7277/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of Allahabad High Court allowed bail to the applicant in a complaint regarding Essential Commodity Act. The grant was based on parity with a co-accused and lack of adverse criminal history, without comments on case merits.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding absence and tampering.

Saurabh Yadav @ Nirmal Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 27

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7277 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Saurabh Yadav @ Nirmal Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag.S.Kaalesh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh-I, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 0235 of 2022, under Section 3/7 Essential Commodity Act, P.S.- Mohanlalganj, District - Lucknow.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He next submits that there is no cogent piece of evidence so as to connect the present applicant in the instant matter. He next contends that identically situated co-accused namely Mo. Mohsin has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8178 of 2022 vide order dated 25.07.2022 thus applicant is also seeking parity of the order aforesaid. He next submits that applicant was not involved in committing the aforesaid offence. He further submits that criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 4 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 03.06.2022. In case he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail but he could not dispute the fact that identically situated co-accused has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court and further criminal history of the applicant has been explained aforesaid.

¶9

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, I find that identically situated co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, further criminal history of the applicant has been explained aforesaid, coupled with the fact that he is languishing in jail since 03.06.2022.2021, thus without commenting on the

¶10

merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant- Saurabh Yadav @ Nirmal Yadav involved in the aforementioned crime 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 following conditions:-

¶12

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶13

(2) 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. He 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;

¶14

(3) 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.; and

¶15

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶17

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶18

Order Date :- 15.11.2022 Ujjawal

¶19

Digitally signed by UJJAWAL PARJAPATI Date: 2022.11.16 18:47:21 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Saurabh Yadav @ Nirmal Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh Yadav @ Nirmal Yadav 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

Arvind Verma Vs State of U.P.Thru.Secy.Home Dep.Lko.

Kanhaiya Lal Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Vishal Pal @ Goldi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vinodanand Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Princ Secy. Cikvil Sectt. Home Lko.

Pradeep Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru the Secy. Home Lko.

Dhaniram Vs State of U.P.