Allowed

Chandan Yadav @ Sonu Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Allahabad HC5 Jan 2023/9948/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed subordinate courts to release the applicant in seven pending criminal cases by accepting a single personal bond and two shared sureties, relying on the Supreme Court decision in Hani Nishad to ensure his release pending trial despite insufficient family funds for individual bonds.

What did the court decide?

Direction to release the applicant on personal bond and two shared sureties in all seven listed criminal cases.

Chandan Yadav @ Sonu Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9948 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Chandan Yadav @ Sonu Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Tilak Raj Singh, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State.

¶6

By means of the instant application the application has prayed for a direction to the learned Court Below concerned to release the applicant by giving the benefits of the order dated 06.03.2017 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Criminal Misc. Case No. 1534/2017 (482Cr.P.C.) on bail by accepting two sureties for all cases and by furnishing his personal bonds, in the end of justice.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been implicated in as many as six cases mentioned in paragraph 6 of the application on the basis of same allegations arising out of incidents when the applicant was serving as Computer Operator in a Company. In all those six cases applicant has already been granted bail, but as only his mother is there in his family, she could not arrange sureties for each of the said six cases.

¶8

The applicant is involved in one more case bearing No. 440 of 2022 under sections 376, 504 IPC, section ¾, Dowry Prohibition Act 1961 and section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki, in which case also he has been granted bail, but he could not be released for want of sureties.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon a decision of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Hani Nishad alias Mohammad Imran, in special Leave to Appeal No. 8914-8915 of 2018 decided on 13.10.2013 and he has requested that a direction be issued to the learned Court below to accept the applicant's personal Bond and two sureties for his release in all the seven cases.

¶10

Having considered the aforesaid circumstances and keeping in view the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of

¶11

Hani Nishad and also considering the fact that the applicant has been granted bail in all the said cases starting from 8.8.2022, but still he could not be released from custody for his inability to submit sureties, in the interest of justice it is provided that the Courts concerned shall release the applicant on bail on his furnishing a Personal Bond and same set of two sureties only, presenting themselves before the courts concerned which shall be considered for his release in all the seven cases, namely-

¶12

(i) Case crime no. 67/2022 under section 109/406/409/419/420 I.P.C. at Police Station Baddopur, District - Barabanki.

¶13

(ii) Case crime no. 133/2022 under section 409/419/420/109 IPC registered at Police Station- Baddopur, District-Barabanki.

¶14

(iii) Case crime no. 252/2022 under section 34/419/420/467/468/471/504/506 IPC registered at Police Station- Masauli, District- Barabanki.

¶15

(iv) Case crime no. 257/2022 under section 34/420/467/468/447/471/427/504/506 IPC registered at Police Station- Masauli, District- Barabanki.

¶16

(v) Case crime no. 306/2022 under section 406/420/417/467/468/471/504/506 IPC registered at Police Station- Masauli, District- Barabanki.

¶17

(vi) Case crime no. 243/2022 under section 34, 419, 420, 447, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC registered at Police StationMasauli, District- Barabanki.

¶18

(vii) Case crime no. 440/2022 under section 376/504 IPC and section 3/4 of D.P. Act Section 3(2)(v) of SC /ST Act, police station - Kotwali Nagar, District - Barabarki.

¶19

With the aforesaid observations/directions this application is disposed of .

¶20

( Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶21

Order Date :- 5.1.2023 A.Nigam

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Chandan Yadav @ Sonu Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandan Yadav @ Sonu Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Neelam Chaturvedi Vs the State of U.P. and Ors.

Abeer Gupta Thru. Natural Guardian Ankur Gupta and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Srikant Yadav and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home. and Others

Kanchan @ Srimati Kanchan Verma and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ram Saran Kashyap Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. /Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Dinesh Kumar Maurya and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another