Neeraj Sahu Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:50076

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1516 of 2024

Applicant :- Neeraj Sahu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Parmanand Gupta,Mansi Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.02 of 2024, under Sections 7, 13(1)(b), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S. Anti Corruption, District Jhansi.

¶8

Learned counsel for applicant submits that offences are punishable up to seven years. Applicant is Class-IV employee of Jhansi Nagar Nigam. The prosecution story is highly improbable as the Sweepers working in Nagar Nigam, Jhansi are on daily wage basis who have been appointed through outsourcing. They are not regular employees. Charge-sheet in the case has been filed.

¶9

It is lastly submitted that complaint was given in this case on 30.12.2023. Applicant was arrested on 02.01.2024 however, another F.I.R. regarding the same incident has been lodged on 10.01.2024 by the anti corruption and before lodging of this F.IR., on 10.01.2024, applicant was already sent on remand which makes the prosecution case doubtful. Applicant has no criminal history however, he is languishing in jail since 02.01.2024.

¶10

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

¶11

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 02.01.2024 having no criminal history, period of incarceration gone into by the applicant, charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant- Neeraj Sahu be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

(iv) The applicant 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.

¶18

(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

¶19

proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(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.

¶21

Order Date :- 24.7.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Neeraj Sahu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neeraj Sahu 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vimal Kumar Sonkar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko.

Awadhesh Kumar Alias Awadhesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kailash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Intzar Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Bhanu Pasi Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Vivek Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko