Allowed

Rajkaran @ Kariya v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Aug 2022BAIL/26095/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, through a coordinate bench, allowed the bail application of Rajkaran @ Kariya in a criminal offense involving attempted murder and other IPC sections, directing his release on personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release the applicant on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount, subject to specific conditions of conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26095 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rajkaran @ Kariya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dhirendra Kumar Verma,Shailendra Kumar Tripathi

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.124 of 2022, registered under Sections 147, 148, 307, 323, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Talgram, District Kannauj during pendency of the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. In the First Information Report, five named and two unknown persons have been made accused. From the statement of informant as well as injured recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., no specific role has been assigned to the applicant for assaulting the injured. He further contended that co-accused, namely, Ram Prakash has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.30085 of 2022 vide order dated 10.08.2022, hence, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has no previous criminal history. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.05.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate in trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶9

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the mandate laid down by Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant, Rajkaran @ Kariya, who is involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 30.8.2022 Nitin Verma

¶16

Digitally signed by NITIN KUMAR VERMA Date: 2022.09.02 10:13:53 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajkaran @ Kariya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajkaran @ Kariya 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vishal @ Vikash Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Sohrab Vs State of U.P.

Jayveer @ Jaichandra Vs State of U.P.

Jubair Vs State of U.P.

Naushad Vs State of U.P.

Tani Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.