Disposed

Jamidar Yadav and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC9 Oct 2023ABAIL/10559/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to seven applicants in a prosecution under various IPC offences involving cheating and criminal conspiracy. Bail was granted subject to strict conditions including personal bond, cooperation with investigation, and surrender of passports, citing Sushila Aggarwal.

What did the court decide?

Applicants granted anticipatory bail on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each, subject to seven conditions.

Jamidar Yadav and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:193636

¶2

Court No. - 71

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10559 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Jamidar Yadav And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Keshari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶7

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶8

This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 66 of 2006, under sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477-A, 120-B, 34 IPC, P.S. Bairia, District Ballia during the pendency of trial.

¶9

4.It is the contention of the learned counsel for the applicants that the First Information Report was lodged against 74 persons. No specific allegations against the applicants could be gleaned out. Upon the lodging of the FIR, the applicants along with others had earlier approached this Court and they have been granted interim protection till submission of charge sheet under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. and now the charge-sheet has been filed by the police and hence they were approaching this Court for anticipatory bail. Learned counsel further submits that the relief as was granted by this Court was never misused by the applicants. The applicants are having definite apprehension that they may be arrested by the police any time.

¶10

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said facts.

¶11

Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicants, they are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 . The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicants Jamidar Yadav, Mohan Verma, Mohd Shah Ali Ansari, Shri Bhagwan Singh, Ram Nath Ram, Surendra Singh and Paras Nath Yadav involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(1) The applicants shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;

¶14

(2) The applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and

¶15

(3) The applicants shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶16

(4) The applicants shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. Their passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

¶17

(5) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicants.

¶18

(6) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶19

(7) The applicants 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of their bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.

¶20

In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

¶21

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of.

¶22

Order Date :- 9.10.2023 RavindraKSingh

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jamidar Yadav and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jamidar Yadav and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Yogesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dinesh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Abdul Wahid Vs State of U.P. and Another

Usha Vs State of U.P. and Another