Allowed

Ayush Srivastava v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Aug 2022BAIL/16373/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed Ayush Srivastava’s second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., granting it on parity with bail granted to a co-accused in an identical case, subject to standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail with two sureties on furnishing a personal bond subject to specific conditions of not tampering with evidence and attending court.

Ayush Srivastava Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16373 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ayush Srivastava Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- R.K. Shahi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri R.K. Shahi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.B. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

This is second bail application of the applicant.

¶7

The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed for want of prosecution by this Court vide order dated 28.03.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10372 of 2022 (Ayush Srivastava vs. State of U.P.).

¶8

This second bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Ayush Srivastava , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 651 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 302, 120-B I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali Sadar, District Deoria.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that identically placed co-accused Rohit has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 02.02.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1155 of 2022, the copy of the said order is annexed as Annexure-8 to the affidavit. It is argued that the case of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused Rohit. It is argued that the present case is a case of parity. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 17 and is in jail since 18.10.2021.

¶10

Per contra , learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments that identically placed co-accused has been granted bail.

¶11

After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the case of the applicant is identical to that of co-accused Rohit. Bail is being granted on parity.

¶12

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Let the applicant- Ayush Srivastava , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like

¶14

amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

(iii) 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.

¶18

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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 I.P.C.

¶19

(v) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶20

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶21

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

¶22

The bail application is allowed.

¶23

Order Date :- 23.8.2022 AS Rathore

¶24

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶25

Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR Date: 2022.08.24 10:02:11 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ayush Srivastava v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ayush Srivastava 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arshad Kha Vs State of U.P.

Ram Adhar Vs State of U.P.

Rohitash Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Surya Prakash Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Naveen Kumar Sharma Vs Central Bureau of Investigation,Anti Corruption Branch

Jay Narayan Gupta Vs State of U.P.