Quashed

Shailendra Yadav and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Apr 2022A227/2687/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging an order enhancing bail conditions, the High Court quashed the District judge's order requiring personal bond. The bench held the order was unlawful under Moti Ram and remanded the matter for reconsideration.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the order dated 5.3.2022 enhancing bail conditions; remanded to District Judge Kanpur Nagar to reconsider within two weeks.

Shailendra Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 67 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2687 of 2022 Petitioner :- Shailendra Yadav And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashok Kumar Chaudhary Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶3

Heard Shri Krishna Kumar Chaurasiya, learned Advocate holding brief of Shri Ashok Kumar Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. Perused the record.

¶4

By means of the present petition the petitioners are assailing the legality and validity of order dated 5.3.2022 passed by the learned District Judge, Kanpur Nagar in S.T. No.1166 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime No.180 of 2019, u/s 306, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.-Najirabad, District Kanpur Nagar.

¶5

Contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners were bailed out vide order dated 6.1.2021 in Case Crime No.180 of 2019, u/s 306, 504, 506 I.P.C. on a personal bond of Rs.1,00000/- each and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. It is further contended that the petitioners are virtually pauper and they are unable to afford the bond of Rs.1,00000/- each, therefore, same may be reduced. In this regard learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn attention to the Court to the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Moti Ram and others vs State of M.P., 1978 AIR (SC) 1594 to buttress his contention.

¶6

I have perused the aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court as well as the provisions of Section 440 of Cr.P.C. and I find that the order impugned dated 5.3.2022 is dehors of the law laid down in the Apex Court's decision in the case of Moti Ram (supra), as such, same is liable to be quashed.

¶7

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 5.3.2022 passed by the learned District Judge, Kanpur Nagar is hereby quashed and the learned District Judge, Kanpur Nagar is directed to reconsider and revisit the issue afresh and again pass an order keeping in view the judgment of Moti Ram (supra) pronounced by Hon'ble Apex Court and also the provisions of Section 440 of Cr.P.C., within a period of two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶8

The petition is disposed off with above observation.

¶9

Order Date :- 25.4.2022/M. Kumar

¶10

Digitally signed by MANISH KUMAR Date: 2022.04.27 10:27:42 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shailendra Yadav and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailendra Yadav and Another v. State of U.P.

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

Shahrukh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Rajendra @ Rajendra Prasad and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Abhay Pratap (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Munni Devi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Yogendra Kumar @ Lablu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kamal Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and 11 Others