Allowed

Rakesh @ Golu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Oct 2023BAIL/15893/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous bail application under Sections 323, 308, 427, 504, 506, 325 IPC, the Allahabad High Court allowed the application, holding that the applicant has made out a case for bail as there are no circumstances disentitling him to bail under Article 21.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding tampering, intimidation, appearance, and location changes.

Rakesh @ Golu Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:190542

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15893 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Rakesh @ Golu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Ram Pandey,Ankit Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shambhavi Nandan

¶5

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. submits that instructions have been received and has no objection in case the bail application is heard on merits.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the allegations in the first information report it is alleged that the four nominated accused persons have assaulted injured Jai Singh, as a result of the same, he sustained injuries. He has drawn attention of this Court to the injury report of the injured, which is at page 34 of the paper book and submits that the injuries have been caused by hard and blunt object. As per the statement of the injured, on the eve of new year the incident has taken place when the applicant and the informant were intoxication. Although, the injuries have been suffered on the head and there is a parietal bone fracture. However, according to the statement of the Doctor, which is at page 48 of the paper book, the injuries were grievous in nature but there is no opinion of the Doctor that the injuries sustained by the injured are life threatening. The dispute has arisen at the spur of the moment. The co-accused-Dharam Raj @ Dharmu has already been enlarged on bail by order dated 29.3.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.15994 of 2023. The applicant has no criminal history. Applicant is languishing in jail since 29.3.2023 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute factual matrix of the case.

¶10

Learned AGA has not brought any fact or circumstances to indicate criminal history or antecedents of the applicant which

¶11

would disentitle the applicant for Bail.

¶12

It is not the case of the State that the applicant has not cooperated in the investigation or proceedings before the trial court.

¶13

The principle that Bail is a rule and Jail is an exception has been well recognised by Apex Court more specifically on the touch stone of Article 21 of the Constitution. The said principle has been reiterated by the Apex Court in Satyendra Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 (10) SCC 51 . Learned AGA has not shown any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the Applicant.

¶14

No material, facts or circumstances has been shown by learned AGA that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses or the accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA for the State.

¶16

Learned AGA for the State has not shown any material or circumstances that the accused/applicant is not entitled to bail in larger interests of the public or State.

¶17

10A. In the present case, it is to be seen that four nominated accused persons have assaulted injured Jai Singh, as a result of the same, he sustained injuries. The injuries have been caused by hard and blunt object. On the eve of new year the incident has taken place when the applicant and the informant were intoxication. According to the statement of the Doctor, which is at page 48 of the paper book, the injuries were grievous in nature but there is no opinion of the Doctor that the injuries sustained by the injured are life threatening. The dispute has arisen at the spur of the moment. The applicant has no criminal history.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant

¶19

has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶20

Let the applicant Rakesh @ Golu involved in Case Crime No.04 of 2023, under Sections 323, 308, 427, 504, 506, 325 I.P.C., Police Station Bardah, District Azamgarh be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶21

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶22

ii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶23

iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted and/or the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶24

iv. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶25

v. 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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶26

vi. The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

¶27

vii. In the event, the applicant changes his residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing.

¶28

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶29

Order Date :- 4.10.2023 Bhaskar

¶30

Digitally signed by :- BHASKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rakesh @ Golu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh @ Golu 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammad Hamid Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sunil Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Prashant @ Lallu Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Amanul Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Kumar Vs State of U.P.