Allowed

Satya Prakash Rao v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Feb 2023BAIL/25576/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the bail application of the applicant, a father-in-law accused under 498-A and 304-B IPC. Relying on the principle of parity as a co-accused in a similar role was already granted bail, the applicant was released on a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Satya Prakash Rao Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 81

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25576 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Satya Prakash Rao Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- R.K.Paramhans Singh,Anil Kumar Pathak,Manvendra Narain Pathak,Sanjay Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- Purushottam Mani Tripathi

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.

¶5

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the accused/ applicant in Case Crime No.120 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Khadda, District Kushi Nagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶6

Heard Shri Anil Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for the accused/ applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State respondent.

¶7

None turned up on behalf of the respondent/ Complainant though the name of the counsel for the respondent is printed in the cause list.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the accused/applicant that the accused/applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. The applicant is father-in-law of the deceased. The co accused namely Suman Rao (mother-in-law of the deceased) who has been assigned the similar role, has already been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 4.7.2022 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.45088 of 2021. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of the main accused. The applicant is in jail since 19.5.2021. The case of the applicant is on better footing, as such, the accused/ applicant should also be released on bail on the ground of parity.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the bail application of the accused/ applicant but did not dispute the parity.

¶10

Considered the rival submissions made by the parties' counsel and perused the record.

¶11

Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case specially the fact that the co accused namely Suman Rao (mother-in-law of the deceased) who has been assigned the similar role, has already been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 4.7.2022 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.45088 of 2021 and the case of the applicant is distinguishable from the main accused, I am of the view that the accused/ applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application filed on behalf of applicant is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant - Satya Prakash Rao involved in Case Crime No.120 of 2021 (supra) 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 with the following conditions :-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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

(ii) 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iii) 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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person,

¶18

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 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.

¶19

(v)The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the ofÏcial website of High Court Allahabad.

¶20

(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶21

(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/OfÏcial shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the ofÏcial website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶22

It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.

¶23

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶24

(Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J)

¶25

Order Date :- 6.2.2023

¶26

Shukla

¶27

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satya Prakash Rao v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satya Prakash Rao 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

Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Nilesh Kumar @ Dheeraj Vs State of U.P.

Shabbir and Another Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Singh Vs State of U.P and Another