Allowed

Rakesh Yadav v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko

Allahabad HC14 Jul 2023/7588/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the High Court at Allahabad (Lucknow Bench) directed the release of the applicant, Rakesh Yadav, on bail. The Court considered the parity of grounds as co-accused with identical roles had been granted bail by a coordinate bench, finding the applicant entitled to release under Section 437 Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of like amount on specified conditions.

Rakesh Yadav Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:46008

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7588 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Rakesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Awasthi,Ashish Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶7

The present fourth bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.435 of 2018 under Sections 326-A, 302, 201, 404, 120-B, 364, 147 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Sadar, District Kheri, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent person and he is in jail since 18.5.2018. He further submits that main role is assigned to Anuj Mishra, who has been granted bail by co-ordinate bench of this Court on 26.5.2023. He further submits that co-accused, Raj Gupta @ Rajaram, having identical role, have already been granted bail by co-ordinate bench of this Court, vide order dated 20.6.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.7797 of 2023 (photo copy of the bail provided by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record). In these circumstances, the applicant is also entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of the applicant for grant of bail, but he conceded the fact that co-accused Anuj Mishra, and Raj Gupta @ Rajaram Pal have already been granted bail by this Court.

¶10

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of the F.I.R., other relevant documents, bail orders of the co-accused, Anuj Mishra and Raj Gupta @ Rajaram, ground of parity as well as totality of fact and circumstances, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶11

Let applicant - Rakesh Yadav - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, 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:-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶13

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(iv) 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 sufÏcient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶16

(v) 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 IPC.

¶17

(vi) 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 sufÏcient 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.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 14.7.2023 Gaurav/-

¶20

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rakesh Yadav v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Yadav v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko

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

Apoorv Mehrotra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. and Another

Mohd. Javed Haneef Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Another

Gourab Verma and Others Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Another

Avinash Chandra Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Others

Dinesh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Vinay Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another