Allowed

Yadvendra Alias Mona v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Aug 2023BAIL/498/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge criminal miscellaneous application considers the bail plea of Yadvendra Alias Mona in a robbery case under Section 392 IPC, where the applicant had a significant criminal record but no direct evidence connected him to the crime until co-accused statements emerged after a month.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions of appearance and non-tampering.

Yadvendra Alias Mona Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:170329

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 498 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Yadvendra Alias Mona Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Singh,Ravi Kant Vikram Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been listed before this Court after nomination by Hon'ble The Chief Justice dated 21.07.2023.

¶8

Heard Sri Atul Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S.B. Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State.

¶9

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 470 of 2022, under Sections 392 IPC, Police Station Sirsaganj, District Firozabad during pendency of the trial.

¶10

FIR of the present case was lodged under Section 392 IPC against unknown person and according to the FIR two unknown persons snatched the bag of the informant.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was not named in the FIR and his complicity was revealed during investigation through the statement of co-accused persons, namely Jackie @ Jaikesh and Dhirendra Singh @ Dhiru after about one month and except the statement of co-accused persons namely Jackie @ Jaikesh and Dhirendra Singh @ Dhiru there is no evidence against the applicant on record.

¶12

He further submits that as applicant is having criminal history of 22 cases, therefore, during investigation he has been made accused in the present matter and he has explained his criminal history in paragraph-10 to the affidavit filed in support of present application. He further submits that co-accused Jackie @ Jaikesh

¶13

has been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 22.03.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9881 of 2023 and he was also having criminal history of 11 cases. He further submits that applicant in the present matter is in jail since 11.08.2022 i.e. for more than a year.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant is having criminal history of 22 cases but could not dispute the fact that name of applicant was surfaced during investigation through the statement of co-accused persons and he has explained his criminal history in paragraph-10 to the affidavit and he is in jail since 11.08.2022 i.e. for more than a year.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶16

Although, applicant is having criminal history of 22 cases but it appears that his name was surfaced in the present matter after about one month through the statement of co-accused persons and nothing incriminating was recovered from his possession and bail application of co-accused Jackie @ Jaikesh and Dhirendra Singh @ Dhiru have been allowed by this Court.

¶17

Further, law is settled that merely on the basis of criminal history bail should not be rejected if otherwise case of bail is made out. Further, offence under Section 392 IPC is triable by the Magistrate-I class and applicant is in jail since 11.08.2022 i.e. for more than a year.

¶18

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶19

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶20

Let the applicant - Yadvendra @ Mona be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶21

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶22

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the

¶23

case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶24

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶25

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

¶26

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶27

Order Date :- 23.8.2023 AK Pandey

¶28

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Yadvendra Alias Mona v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yadvendra Alias Mona 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

Jugraj Singh Vs State of U.P.

Dharamveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mustkim Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sanju Vs State of U.P.

Gunakar Urf Shri Krishna Vs State of U.P.

Satyendra Kumar Chaubey @ Sabloo Vs State of U.P.