Allowed

Ravi Pratap @ Ravi Prakash v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2024/1753/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court granted bail to Ravi Pratap (@ Ravi Prakash) in an FIR under Sections 323, 504, and 316 IPC. The applicant, who had been in custody since January 2024, was released on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties over conditions to not tamper with witnesses or evidence.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties each.

Ravi Pratap @ Ravi Prakash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:19884

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1753 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ravi Pratap @ Ravi Prakash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Pandey,Abhishek,Sharad Tiwari,Utkarsh Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Vakalatnama filed by Shri Rishabh Srivastava, Advocate on behalf of Complainant of the case in question is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime/FIR No.0236 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 316 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Dehat, DistrictGonda, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case, he is having no criminal history and in jail since 30.01.2024. He further submitted that FIR of the present case was challenged before this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.4484 of 2022, in which, arrest of the applicant was stayed. He further submitted that applicant cooperated in the investigation and he never misuse the liberty granted by the Investigating Officer. He further submitted that charge-sheet was filed by the Investigating Officer, but he has not received any summon and suddenly he was taken into custody. He further submitted that applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submitted that due to act of the applicant as well as other co-accused persons, victim has suffered a miscarriage but they did not dispute this fact that the arrest of the applicant

¶11

was stayed by the Writ Court.

¶12

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of FIR as well as other relevant documents, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶13

Let the applicant- Ravi Pratap @ Ravi Prakash , who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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.

¶14

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶15

(ii) 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.

¶16

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶17

(iv) 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 IPC.

¶18

(v) 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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.

¶19

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 5.3.2024 V. Sinha

¶22

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ravi Pratap @ Ravi Prakash v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Pratap @ Ravi Prakash v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

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

Rajeshwari Devi vs Akhilesh Pratap Singh, Distt. Basic Education Officer, Distt. Sitapur

Pawan Kumar Gupta vs Shri Rajiv Kumar Srivastava, Addl. General Manager / Unit Head (R.B) Iti Ltd., Raebarel and Another

Dr. Mohammad Shadab Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Higher Education Lko. and 5 Others

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

Shiv Mohan Singh Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Satendri Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.