Allowed

Pradeep @ Pradeep Sethi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Apr 2022BAIL/10761/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10761 of 2022 where the High Court allowed the applicant to be enlarged on bail in a case involving IPC Sections 420, 467-471 and Excise Act sections, based on counsel's submissions regarding false implication and lack of criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by personal bond and two sureties subject to four conditions.

Pradeep @ Pradeep Sethi Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10761 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Pradeep @ Pradeep Sethi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.35 of 2022 at Police Station-New Agra, District-Agra under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Sections 60(1), 63, 72 of the Excise Act. The applicant is in jail since 08.02.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act)/learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.30, Agra on 19.02.2022.

¶7

Shri Ashutosh Singh, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. No liquor or any incriminating article was recovered from the applicant. The offending vehicle was in fact sold by the applicant to the principal offender-Shakir Ali much prior to the incident. The principal offenderShakir Ali and not the applicant is liable for misuse the vehicle after latter had purchased the same. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the

¶8

applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶9

Shri Rishi Chaddha, learned A.G.A. could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. He, however, does not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶10

I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant-Pradeep @ Pradeep Sethi be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶13

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness. (iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person

¶16

acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 28.4.2022 Ashish Tripathi

¶18

Digitally signed by ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI Date: 2022.04.29 10:10:53 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pradeep @ Pradeep Sethi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep @ Pradeep Sethi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nitin Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Junaid Ali Vs State of U.P.

Subhan @ Shahbaz Vs State of U.P.

Jakir Khan @ Guddu Vs State of U.P.

Bagga @ Fakruddin Vs State of U.P.

Kaleem Vs State of U.P.