Allowed

Naveen Jayaswal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko.

Allahabad HC27 Feb 2024/1265/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, allowed a bail application filed by Naveen Jayaswal. The court granted bail on the ground of parity with two co-accused who had already been released. Standard bail conditions were imposed.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions preventing tampering with witnesses and ensuring attendance in court.

Naveen Jayaswal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:17963

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1265 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Naveen Jayaswal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Jaikaran Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that except four bags of country liquor found in open place, there is nothing in the prosecution case to connect the applicant with crime in question.

¶8

The co-accused Vinay Jaiswal and Ajeet Singh have been enlarged on bail vide orders dated 5.2.2024 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Nos.965 of 2024 and 969 of 2024 respectively. It is submitted that two injured witnesses Madan and Nand Kishore in their statement have not alleged complicity of the applicant. Role assigned to the applicant in the statement of co-accused Akhand Pratap Singh is providing country liquor. It is submitted that there is no incriminating material to link the applicant with the crime in question.

¶9

The applicant seeks parity with the bail order of co-accused Vinay Jaiswal and Ajeet Singh who have been enlarged on bail as referred to above. The applicant is in jail since 28.4.2022. He has explained criminal history in para 16 of the bail application.

¶10

3. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged

¶11

on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that it is a case of parity.

¶13

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the coaccused persons have been enlarged on bail, as referred to above, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which the applicant is in jail, the co-accused have been enlarged on bail and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

6. Let the applicant Naveen Jayaswal, involved in Case Crime No.36 of 2022 under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 304, 272 I.P.C. and 60(A) Excise Act, P.S. Mill Area, district Raebareli, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(iii) The applicant 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.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence

¶19

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 applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

(vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

7. The application is allowed accordingly, on the ground of parity.

¶23

Order Date :- 27.2.2024 kkb/

¶24

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

Naveen Jayaswal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naveen Jayaswal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Tara Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Smt. Snehlata Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Roshan Lal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Civil Secrett. Lko.

Shivam Maurya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. U.P. Lko.

Rohit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Suhel Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others