Allowed

Rohit and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Feb 2023BAIL/52391/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to applicants Rohit and Kundra @ Rajesh involved in an IPC murder case on the ground of parity with a released co-accused. The release is subject to strict conditions regarding tampering with evidence, presence in court, and adherence to procedural timelines.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail with personal bond and two sureties each, subject to specific undertaking conditions.

Rohit and Another Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52391 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rohit And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicants, Rohit and Kundra @ Rajesh, who are involved in Case Crime No. 168 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 I.P.C., Police Station- Diyoriya Kalan, District- Pilibhit and are in jail since 30.07.2022, are seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that similarly placed co-accused, Mohit Rajpoot, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court by order dated 31.10.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 47460 of 2022. He has further submitted that since the role of the applicants are identical to that of co-accused, Mohit Rajpoot, who has already been enlarged on bail, they are also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity and for the reasons given in the order of co-accuseds.

¶8

The prayer for bail has vehemently been opposed by learned A.G.A.

¶9

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A., this Court is of the view that the applicants have made out a case for grant of bail on the ground of parity.

¶10

In view of the above, let the applicants be released on bail on their executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶11

(i) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶12

(ii) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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.

¶13

(iii) The applicants shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) In case the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against them in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(v) The applicants shall remain present in person 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 applicants are deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.

¶16

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶17

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶18

Order Date :- 28.2.2023 Rohit

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rohit and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit and Another 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

Alam Vs State of U.P.

Sonveer Vs State of U.P.

Siddhu Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ravindra Rana @ Tinku @ Pahalwan Vs State of U.P.

Vimal Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Vikas Sharma @ Vikki Sharma Vs State of U.P.