Allowed

Rajkumar Urf Tarjan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Apr 2023BAIL/9218/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Hyderabad Court fixed a criminal bail application filed against the applicant charged under Excise Act, IPC, and Arms Act sections. The court allowed bail subject to conditions including a personal bond, sureties, and compliance with trial procedures.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail with personal bond, two sureties (one family member), and conditions against tampering and criminal activity.

Rajkumar Urf Tarjan Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9218 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Rajkumar Urf Tarjan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Singh,Vinod Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Mithlesh Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the 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.04 of 2023, under Sections 60(1) 72 Excise Act and Section 420, 465, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 3/25 of Arms Act, P.S. Haldi, District Ballia.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case; nothing has been recovered from possession of applicant; there is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. The applicant was not arrested from spot. The applicant is a poor driver and is earning his livelihood by private driving and has not committed the offence in question The applicant has no criminal history. Moreover, there is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future. The applicant is languishing in jail since 6.1.2023 and in case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate in trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶9

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant, Rajkumar Urf Tarjan , who is involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (one should be of a family member) 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.

¶11

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

¶12

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking

¶13

any adjournment.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶17

Order Date :- 4.4.2023 Dev/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- DEV PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajkumar Urf Tarjan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajkumar Urf Tarjan 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

Azeem Vs State of U.P.

Indra Bahadur Pal Vs State of U.P.

Ramjani Vs State of U.P.

Raju Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Rinku Vs State of U.P.

Mohit Vs State of U.P.