Allowed

Deepak v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Nov 2022BAIL/30036/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was filed under Sections 364-A and 212 of the IPC. The applicant claimed innocence and alleged false implication. The co-accused had already been released on bail. The High Court, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the charge, found it to be a fit case for granting bail subject to strict conditions regarding appearance in court.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

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

¶1

Court No. - 92 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30036 of 2022

¶2

Applicant :- Deepak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hinchh Lal Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶5

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.254 of 2022, under Sections 364-A, 212 of IPC, Police Station- Bahjoi, District- Sambhal.

¶6

As per the prosecution story, it has been alleged that the father of the informant was kidnapped by Raghupal Yadav and Ram Autar and thereafter a call was received by the first informant on her mobile where a demand of ransom was made for release of the father of the first informant.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. He has further stated that the applicant is not named in the FIR. It is further submitted that the role of the applicant is assigned as the driver of the vehicle in which the father of the informant was kidnapped. It is also submitted that there is no independent witness of the alleged incident. It is further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant except the present case. It is further submitted that the coaccused Ragghupal @ Ragghupal Yadav and Awadhesh have already been enlarged on bail by another Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 18.10.2022 and 4.8.2022, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Applications No.43970 of 2022 and 31301 of 2022 respectively. Copies of the bail orders have been before the Court. Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant having better case for getting bail on account of parity. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, he may flee from the course of law or may, otherwise, misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is in jail since 25.05.2022 and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is very bleak.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but he has not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in mind that co-accused has already been released on bail by this Court and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶10

Let applicant- Deepak , be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶11

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

¶12

(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.

¶13

(iii) 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 applicant 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

(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.

¶15

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 4.11.2022/ Shiv

¶17

Digitally signed by SHIV KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2022.11.09 10:32:05 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deepak v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak 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

Kamal Saini Vs State of U.P.

Faheem Vs State of U.P.

Chanchal Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Vineeta Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Verma Vs State of U.P.

Sangram Singh Vs State of U.P.