Allowed

Jitendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Dec 2022BAIL/48957/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allows a bail application filed by Jitendra in a murder and conspiracy case. The court found the applicant has made a case for bail and ordered his release subject to furnishing a personal and two surety bonds and specific conditions of appearance.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on personal bond and two local sureties subject to undertakings regarding attendance and conduct at trial.

Jitendra Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48957 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Jitendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brij Kishore Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

The case is taken up in the revised call.

¶6

Second supplementary affidavit has been filed by counsel for the applicant in Court today, which is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.

¶7

Heard Mr. Mahendra Pratap, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Brij Kishore Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant Jitendra with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 235 of 2022, under sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 120-B, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Baraut, District- Baghpat during pendency of trial.

¶9

As per F.I.R. version, on 28.03.2022 at about 8:00 p.m., brother of the informant Jitendra went out of the house and at about 10:00 p.m. someone informed him that someone has killed his brother and he was lying on Kotana Road and when they reached the spot, applicant, Anand S/o Rajveer and 2-3 unknown persons fled away by killing his brother.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that all the accused persons along with applicant met at the house of Smt. Kiran @ Babu @ Ritu three days prior to the incident and conspired for murder of the deceased. He further submits that applicant has been assigned the role of hatching conspiracy along with Smt. Kiran @ Babu @ Ritu for killing the deceased. There is no eye witness of the incident and only on the basis of suspicion, applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the co-accused of this case Smt. Kiran @ Babu @ Ritu, in whose house conspiracy was hatched, has already been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.12.2022 in

¶11

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.46086 of 2022. It is next argued that there is no prospect of trial being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. The applicant has criminal history of 14 cases, which have satisfactorily been explained in the application as well as in supplementary affidavit filed by counsel for the applicant. Out of 14 cases of criminal history one case is of serious offence, in which applicant has already been acquitted. The applicant is languishing in jail since 03.10.2022. There is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Accordingly, he requests for bail.

¶12

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶14

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

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(iii) 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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(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.

¶19

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶20

Order Date :- 22.12.2022 Rahul.

¶21

Digitally signed by RAHUL GOSWAMI Date: 2022.12.22 17:18:02 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

Soni Chaurasiya Vs State of U.P.

Atul Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deepak Shahi Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Singh Vs State of U.P.

Haroon Vs State of U.P.

Vineet Kumar Kashyap Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others