Allowed

Jitendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Oct 2022BAIL/42293/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case under various IPC sections. The court noted the co-accused's bail and imposed strict conditions regarding attendance and prohibition of seeking adjournments to prevent misuse of bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with strict conditions regarding court attendance and no adjournments.

Jitendra Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42293 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Jitendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Sahu,Amit Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 335 of 2020, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506, 406 and 120 B IPC, Police Station- Saurikh , District - Kannauj .

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. It is submitted that the first informant has neither given any amount to the applicant nor any transfer was made in his bank account. The main accused Sonu has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 17.5.20221 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 141184 of 2021. The applicant is also entitled for grant of bail. The applicant has no criminal history. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, applicant may flee from the course of law or may, otherwise, misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is in jail since 28.7.2022 and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is very bleak.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but he has not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant that co-accused has already been released on bail.

¶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 namely Jitendra be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number on his/her furnishing personal

¶11

bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that applicant 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.

¶13

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his/her counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against applicant under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure presence of the applicant, 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 the applicant, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(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 the applicant in accordance with law.

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 12.10.2022 Rahul Dwivedi/-

¶18

(Piyush Agrawal, J.)

¶19

Digitally signed by RAHUL DWIVEDI Date: 2022.10.12 14:54:32 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jitendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra 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

Vedprakash Vs State of U.P.

Raju Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav @ Dainy Vs State of U.P.

Hemant @ Kallu Vs State of U.P.

Aqib Vs State of U.P.

Ayan Khan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others