Allowed

Om Prakash v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 May 2022BAIL/20293/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application filed by Om Prakash in Sessions Trial No.117 of 2007. The court found merit in the argument of false implication and a communication gap causing absence from trial, granting bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20293 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Om Prakash Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ranjan Dhwaj Tiwari 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 Sessions Trial No.117 of 2007, Case Crime No.542 of 2003 at Police Station-Ghugali, District-Maharajganj under Sections 395, 397 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 08.12.2021.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Maharajganj on 17.12.2021.

¶7

Shri Ranjan Dhwaj Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant is a Class IV employee in the irrigation department. The applicant had shifted from Kushinagar to Maharajganj. Further, the parties had arrived at a compromise. There was a communication gap between the applicant and his counsel. The applicant was not intimated the date of proceedings before the trial court by the office of his counsel which caused his absence from the trial on the

¶8

appointed dates. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and undertakes to join the court proceedings.

¶9

Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned A.G.A. could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶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-Om Prakash 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 acquainted with the facts of the case so as to

¶16

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 :- 24.5.2022 Ashish Tripathi

¶18

Digitally signed by ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI Date: 2022.05.25 15:35:39 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Om Prakash v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Prakash 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

Rahul Vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Vs State of U.P.

Abid Vs State of U.P.

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

Manoj Kumar Vs the Zonal Director Narcotics Control Bureau

Vinay @ Vinno Vs State of U.P.