Allowed

Animesh Yadad @ Anmesh Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC20 Sept 2023BAIL/23843/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the Allahabad High Court directed the release of the applicant on bail subject to personal bond and two sureties. The court noted the lack of response from the informant and the applicant's claim of false implication, granting bail without a merits-based comment.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions to appear in trial and not tamper with evidence.

Animesh Yadad @ Anmesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:181424

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23843 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Animesh Yadad @ Anmesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Shekhar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma, J.

¶6

Notice issued to the informant-respondent has been served upon him, but neither he appeared nor filed counter affidavit.

¶7

Heard Sri Shashi Shekhar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State-opposite party and perused the record.

¶8

The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 54 of 2023, under Sections 354-Ka, 354-Gha, 504, 506 I.P.C and 9/10 POCSO Act alongwith Section 3 (1) (Da), 3(1) (Da), 3(2) (Va), of the S.C / S.T. Act, Police Station Nonhara, District Ghazipur, during the pendency of trial.

¶9

Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. According to the learned counsel for the applicant it is a counterblast case, in which the accused-applicant has falsely been implicated prior to this alleged incident on 03.04.2023, the informant himself had caused injury to the accused-applicant on 03.04.2023, when he approached the concerned police station, an F.I.R was not lodged, thereafter he moved an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C, which was converted into complaint case. Being annoyed, a false and

¶10

fabricated case has been lodged against the present accusedapplicant. The applicant is in jail since 29.04.2023 . In case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶11

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶12

Having regard to the submissions made but without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Let the applicant- Animesh Yadad @ Anmesh Yadav, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

¶14

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶15

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶16

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 20.9.2023 Vinod.

¶19

Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Animesh Yadad @ Anmesh Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Animesh Yadad @ Anmesh Yadav 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lokendra @ Lobit Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Sachin Vs State of U.P.

Alok Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Vs State of U.P.

Tariq @ Tarikh Vs State of U.P.