Allowed

Yodesh Mathuria v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Feb 2023BAIL/5914/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

single-bench bail application was allowed for the applicant, who was accused under the UP Gangster and Anti-Social Activities Act. The court observed that since the applicant had already been granted bail in a separate serious offense case, there was no point in keeping him in custody during trial. The order granted bail subject to personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

Yodesh Mathuria Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 47

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5914 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Yogesh Mathuria Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mrityunjay Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. on behalf of State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 225 of 2022, under Section 2/3 Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Atraruli, District Aligarh, during pendency of trial.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that the applicant has been enlarged on bail in two cases on the basis of which the Prevention of Gangster Act has been invoked against him. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.05.2022.

¶8

On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant has been involved in serious offence in Case Crime No. 56 of 2021, under Sections 302, 201, 120-B, 24 IPC. He is director of the hospital where one child was died of unfortunate death but could not repudiate that fact that the applicant has been enlarged on bail in case crime no. 56 of 2021.

¶9

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that the applicant has already granted bail in case crime no. 56 of 2021 by the court, evidence, complicity of accused, it may take some time to conclude the trial. Hence, therefore, there is no point of keeping the applicant in jail during the pendency of the

¶10

trial. Hence, therefore, the bail application is allowed.

¶11

Observation made by this court while deciding the present bail application are prima facie in nature and shall have no bearing on the trial of the case.

¶12

Let the applicant Yogesh Mathuria 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶13

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the trial.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 17.2.2023

¶17

A. Farooqui

¶18

Digitally signed by :- AIMAN FAROOQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Yodesh Mathuria v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yodesh Mathuria 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Baisoya Vs State of U.P.

Nitin Vs State of U.P.

Deenbandhu Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P.

Atiq Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Samar Vs State of U.P.

Aale Hasan Vs State of U.P.