Allowed

Rajjan and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2024/12266/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held a fit case for bail on parity with a co-accused. Fixed conditions for injunctions, attendance, and prevention of tampering. Disallowed discussion on merits. Order stated not to affect trial outcome.

What did the court decide?

Reliesen applicants on bail with personal bond and two sureties each. Fixed conditions regarding tampering, attendance, and court appearance.

Rajjan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:79734

¶2

Court No. - 16

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12266 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rajjan And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kant Yadav,Dheeraj Awasthi,Mayank Dwivedi

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

1.Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶8

2. It is contended on behalf of the applicants that the co-accused Sarvesh alias Chotu having similar role to that of the applicant has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 27.8.2024 passed in Bail No.9066 of 2024.

¶9

It is further submitted that against all the accused persons, there are general allegation of beating three injured persons. Out of three, Ashok has suffered depressed fracture on left parietal region. From the applicants side, there are two injured. The injuries received from applicants' side has not been explained by the prosecution.

¶10

Learned counsel also submits that the applicants are in jail since 5.11.2024.

¶11

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicants of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

3. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicants.

¶13

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, the co-accused, named above, has been granted bail, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, for the period for which they are in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicants on bail.

¶14

5. Let the applicants Rajjan, Rajkumar and Sonelal involved in case crime No.190 of 2023 under sections 147, 452, 323, 504,

¶15

506, 308 I.P.C., P.S. Safipur, district Unnao be released on bail on their each furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

(i) The applicants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

(iii) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

(iv) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.

¶20

(v) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

(vi) 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.

¶22

6. Bail application is allowed accordingly, on parity. It is made clear that any observation made in this order shall not affect the trial.

¶23

Order Date :- 2.12.2024 kkb/

¶24

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR BARANWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rajjan and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajjan and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shailesh vs State of. U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Noor Alam Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Adesh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Syed Zamin Abbas Rizvi @ Yameen Vs State of Up. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Anil Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.