Allowed

Rupendra @ Suraj v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Allahabad HC22 May 2024/2232/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the bail application of the applicant charged with offences under IPC and the Arms Act. Granting bail on the ground of parity after a co-accused received bail, considering the applicant had no prior criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs. 20,000/- each subject to standard conditions of appearance and non-interference.

Rupendra @ Suraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:39108

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2232 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rupendra @ Suraj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Lal Bahadur Khan,Shashi Dhar Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The applicant seeks enlargement the on bail in FIR No. 373 of 2023 under Section 395, 397, 412 I.P.C. and 3/25 of the Arms Act, Police StationKursi, District - Barabanki.

¶8

In terms of the F.I.R., certain persons had come in the house of the informant on 18.12.2023 and all the ornaments kept were taken by them. Subsequently on the basis of the recovery memo, the applicant was linked with the offence in question alongwith other co accused.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the co accused Vinod Kumar Rawat @ Ashu has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 6.5.2024. From the possession of the applicant, somewhat similar recovery was shown. Hence, the applicant who is languishing in jail since 23.12.2023 having no criminal antecedents prior to the lodging of the present case, may be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposes the bail application by arguing that the substantial amount of ornaments were recovered from the applicant and the other co accused in term of the recovery memo, the bail application is liable to be rejected. He, however, does not disputes the ground of parity.

¶11

Considering the fact that the co accused with similar allegations, was enlarged on bail by this

¶12

Court coupled with the fact that the the applicant who is languishing in jail since 23.12.2023 having no criminal antecedent prior to the lodging of the present case, I am of the view that the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant Rupendra @ Suraj be released on bail in the aforesaid first information report number on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶15

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶16

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offences of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶17

(c) 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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

Order Date :- 22.5.2024 Shukla.

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rupendra @ Suraj v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rupendra @ Suraj v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Civil Sectt. 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

Smt. Bindu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lucknow

Mohammad Ikrar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Kuldeep Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 4 Others

Vinay Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Narendra Parihar @ Annu @ Anmol vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ramniwas @ Ramnibas Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another