Allowed

Rahul @ Gurujeet @ Panchabi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Aug 2023BAIL/33893/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application filed by the accused in a snatch-theft case involving IPC Sections 392 and 411. Despite the charge-sheet filing, the court noted the applicant's cooperation and lack of recovered evidence, ordering release with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail on personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions regarding cooperation and witness safety.

Rahul @ Gurujeet @ Panchabi Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:160999

¶2

Court No. - 47

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33893 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Rahul @ Gurujeet @ Panchabi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Yadav,Mahendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The instant bail application has been preferred on behalf of the applicant- Rahul @ Gurujeet @ Panchabi, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.0303 of 2023, under Section 392, 411 I.P.C. registered at Police Station Karhal, District Mainpuri, during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

In brief, the prosecution case is that the informant- Dinesh lodged a first information report alleging therein that on 8.6.2023 at about 01:00 p.m., while he was returning with his wife, daughter and son on motorcycle, four miscreants on two motorcycles having description R-15 blue color and FZ black color chased them, and snatched the ensuing items and fled towards Karhal; i) a purse containing mobile phone of Lava company bearing SIM No.7300514466, another mobile phone of Vivo company bearing SIM No.6398173051, medical prescription slip of the daughter of complainant, and a passbook of Bank of Baroda along with Rs.14000/-; ii) and also a set of earings of the wife of one Prem Chand, who were coming behind them.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of confessional statement, and nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. He further submits that the police planted the recovery and obtained the false confessional statement of the applicant. He further submits that after the arrest, no Test Identification Parade was conducted by the police. He further submits that after registration of instant FIR, the police has falsely implicated the applicant in other cases; Case

¶10

Crime No.242/2023, under Section 392/411 I.P.C., P.S. Bichhwa and Case Crime No.116/2023, under Sections 3/25 Arms Act read with sections 41/102 of Cr.P.C. and sections 411/413 I.P.C. at P.S. Barnahal, District Mainpuri. Apart from the aforesaid cases, the applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit and he has been languishing in jail since 9.6.2023. If the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in the trial.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and has submitted that the applicant is a habitual offender and there are numerous FIRs lodged against the applicant, and the charge-sheet has been filed on 28.6.2023, in the instant case.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it's stated that the charge-sheet has already been filed against the applicant; the applicant has been languishing in jail since 9.6.2023 and has co-operated with the investigating officer, during the investigation; it will take a sufficiently long time to conclude the trial, and no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the accused-applicant in jail during pendency of the trial. Considering the above facts, this Court is inclined to enlarge the accused applicant on bail. Therefore, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant, Rahul @ Gurujeet @ Panchabi, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the court's satisfaction, subject to the following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶14

i. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and shall cooperate with the police as required.

¶15

ii. The applicant shall refrain from pressurizing the witnesses during the trial.

¶16

iii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the same shall be grounds for cancellation of bail.

¶18

Order Date :- 9.8.2023 Anil K. Sharma

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ANIL KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul @ Gurujeet @ Panchabi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul @ Gurujeet @ Panchabi 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Kumar Gawaskar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Parul Tyagi Vs Gaurav Tyagi

Junaid Vs State Of U. P. and another

Anoop Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anil Vs State of U.P.

Umesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.