Allowed

Lodha @ Sameer v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 May 2022BAIL/15155/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Approved bail application challenging conviction under IPC Sections 395 and 412. Court found merit in counsel's submissions regarding false implication and lack of independent evidence, allowing release on personal bond and sureties with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering, influencing witnesses, and making inducements.

Lodha @ Sameer Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15155 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Lodha @ Sameer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jawahar Lal Yadava 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.261 of 2021 at Police Station-Bardah District-Azamgarh under Sections 395, 412 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 20.01.2022.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Azamgarh on 25.02.2022.

¶7

Shri Jawahar Lal Yadava, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant was not named in the FIR. One country made pistol, live cartridges, 22 pairs of payal, 6 pairs of Bichhiya, 9 pieces of Chundla Sliver, 3 rings, one nathiya sahara, 3 lockets, one ear rings were planted on the applicant to frame him in the instant case to show proficiency of police investigators. There is no independent witness to the recovery. Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence. No forensic science laboratory report which confirms that the recovered articles are made of precious metal has been produced by the prosecution. No test identification parade has

¶8

been conducted by the police. Learned counsel for the applicant has explained the criminal history of the applicant and contends that prior to the instant case, the applicant does not have any criminal history. However after his nomination in the instant case, the applicant has become a soft target and convenient scapegoat for the police authorities. The police authorities repeatedly framed him in false cases in quick succession subsequent to the instant case to burnish their professional credentials. The criminal cases do not have any bearing on the instant case. The applicant is not a flight risk and there is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶9

Shri I.P. Srivastava, learned A.G.A for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.

¶10

I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly 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- Lodha @ Sameer be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount

¶13

to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

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

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶16

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶17

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

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶19

Order Date :- 25.5.2022

¶20

Nadeem

¶21

Digitally signed by NADEEM AHMAD Date: 2022.05.30 16:18:15 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lodha @ Sameer v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lodha @ Sameer 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

Om Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh @ Rajeshwar Prasad Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Kumar Vs the Zonal Director Narcotics Control Bureau

Dharmendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Hariom Verma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gaurav Dubey @ Golu Dubey Vs State of U.P.