Allowed

Deepak Kumar Prajapati v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Aug 2022BAIL/2229/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 302, 394, and 411 IPC, the High Court granted bail to Deepak Kumar Prajapati, relying on the principle that his footing is identical to a co-accused who had previously been granted bail by the same court, imposing standard conditions on the applicant.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount with specific undertakings.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2229 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Prajapati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Om Prakash Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Deepak Kumar Prajapati, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 350 of 2021, under Sections 302, 394, 411 IPC, P.S. Sigara, District Varanasi during pendency of trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the coaccused, Manoj Gupta, has been granted bail by this Court on 11.7.2022 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 7234 of 2022. The case of the applicant stands on identical footing, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 30.7.2021.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but does not dispute the claim of parity.

¶9

Let the applicant involved in aforesaid case be released on bail 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:-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶11

(ii) 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 as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶12

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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.

¶14

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial

¶15

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

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶18

Order Date :- 23.8.2022 Ruchi Agrahari

¶19

Digitally signed by RUCHI AGRAHARI Date: 2022.08.23 17:07:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deepak Kumar Prajapati v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Kumar Prajapati 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

Deepak @ Deep Prakash @ Deepu Vs State of U.P., through Secretary Home Govt. of U.P.

Sahul Sonkar Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Vs State of U.P.

Vishram Singh @ Ranvir Singh Vs State of U.P.