Rakesh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 79

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55129 of 2022

Applicant :- Rakesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sourabh Pathak,J.P. Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

IInd Supplementary affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri J.P. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed u/s 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 208 of 2015, under Sections 302, 394, 504, 506, 34 of IPC, Police Station Soraon, District Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the applicant along with three co-accused persons, namely, Surendra Yadav, Mahesh Yadav and Ram Kumar Yadav @ Kallu are stated to have assaulted the brother of the informant Haseen Akhtar with firearm weapons thereby causing his death instantaneously on 31.03.2015 at about 05:00 PM.

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He had no knowledge of the said FIR having been lodged against him as he is doing his job at Mumbai. The other named co-accused persons faced trial and have been acquitted vide order dated 23.12.2021 passed in S.T. No.524 of 2015 and S.T. No.22 of 2016. There are general allegations against all the accused persons and the role of the applicant is similar to other co-accused persons, who have already been acquitted in the matter. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The

¶10

circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. There is no likelihood of conviction of the applicant in the matter. The applicant is languishing in jail since 02.09.2022 having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence, evidence on record, stage of trial and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for releasing the applicant on bail.

¶13

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the bail application is allowed . Let the applicant Rakesh Yadav involved in aforesaid 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 with the following conditions that :-

¶14

(i) The Court below is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of one year or as early as possible in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar Vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another Vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment.

¶15

(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶16

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

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Order Date :- 14.3.2023 Siddhant

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rakesh Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chhottan Tiwari Urf Muratdhwaj Vs State of U.P.

Yatendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Smt Muliya Vs State of U.P.

Ajai Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Ashish Soni Vs State of U.P.

Umesh Paswan Vs State of U.P.