Allowed

Vikas Solanki v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Jun 2022BAIL/24291/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court released the applicant on bail in a criminal trial for theft, cheating, and forgery offences. The order relied on the fact that co-accused had been granted bail by coordinate benches and the applicant had no prior criminal record. Strict conditions were imposed regarding evidence tampering, court attendance, and subsequent trial proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to eight specific conditions regarding evidence, attendance, and trial proceedings.

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

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24291 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vikas Solanki Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anshu Singh,Hemendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Hemendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arvind Kumar, learned AGA, for the State, and perused the record of the case.

¶6

By way of the present application, the applicant has made a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.236 of 2021, under Sections 411, 413, 414, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, Police Station Dadon, District Aligarh during the pendency of trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been roped in the present case by the Police totally on false and baseless allegation as nothing incriminating was recovered from his possession and further the applicant never involved in any theft of vehicle as alleged in the FIR. He further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 3.9.2021 and after arrest in the present case, he has been implicated as many as five cases of similar nature including a case of Gangsters Act. He further submitted that before 3.9.2021 the applicant was not having any criminal history to his credit. Learned counsel further argued that co-accused Ajay @ Vijay, who was also said to have been arrested from the spot has already been released on bail by this Court on 13.1.2022 passed in Criminal Misc.Bail Application No.44872 and similarly co-accused Lavish @Lavesh @Sheru

¶8

was also released on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.3.2022 passed in Criminal Misc.Bail Application No.55512 of 2021 and co-accused Mahesh on 16.2.2022 was also released on bail and case of the applicant is also at par with the co-accused.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA, although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that the co-accused Lavish @Lavesh @Sheru and Ajay @ Vijay have been released on bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court and before the arrest of the applicant, he was not having any criminal history.

¶10

I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and have perused the record of the case.

¶11

A perusal of the FIR shows that three accused persons were arrested from the spot, namely, Ajay @ Vijay, Lavesh @Lavesh @Sheru and Mahesh and they were already granted bail by Coordinate Benches of this Court and further the applicant is in jail since 3.9.2021 and before arrest there is no criminal history of the applicant, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Consequently, the present bail application filed on behalf of the applicant is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant-Vikas Solanki 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. It is further clarified that the trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶22

Order Date :- 20.6.2022 SKM

¶23

Digitally signed by SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2022.06.22 12:45:43 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vikas Solanki v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Solanki 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

Ajeem and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhupendra Narayan Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shyam Sundr and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ritik Lakhera Vs State of U.P.

Om Prakash Singh Vs State of U.P.

Narsingh Yadav Vs State of U.P.