Allowed

Rajesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Jun 2022BAIL/20171/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to applicant Rajesh in a case under UP Gangster Act, 1986, noting other co-accused were already on bail. Ordered release on personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions regarding attendance and avoiding abuse of liberty.

What did the court decide?

Respondent restricted to personal bond and two sureties; strict undertakings on attendance and avoiding abuse of bail liberty imposed.

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

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20171 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rajesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sabhajeet Yadav,Naveen Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Naveen Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant- Rajesh, who is involved in Case Crime No. 0026 of 2022, under Section 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986, Police Station- Babugarh, District- Hapur is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the gang chart annexed to the First Information Report discloses only one case against the applicant in which he is already on bail. Copy of the bail order has been brought on record as Annexure-3 to the affidavit to the bail application. It is further contended that the other co-accused, namely, Manoj, Adil and Neeraj Jaiswal have already been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court on 21.04.2022, 12.05.2022 and 20.05.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.12285 of 2022, 17369 of 2022 and 19145 of 2022 respectively. Applicant is languishing in jail since 26.11.2021 and undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. while opposing the bail application does not dispute the fact that there is only one criminal case pending against the applicant and other co-accused have already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as the other co-accused have already been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court and in the only criminal case, applicant is already on bail, keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant- Rajesh be released on bail in aforesaid case

¶11

crime on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶12

(i) 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. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶13

(ii) The applicant 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

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

¶15

(iv) 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. 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.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 28.6.2022 SK Goswami

¶18

Digitally signed by SHIVAKANT GOSWAMI Date: 2022.06.28 18:12:38 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh 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

Haji Raham Ilahi Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Kumar and 3 Others Vs Munna Lal @ Munnu Lal

Lakhan Singh Vs Phool Singh and 2 Others

Sarita Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rishikesh Yadav @ Kade Vs State of U.P. and Another

Zishan Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another