Allowed

Surendra Rawat @ Matru v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt.

Allahabad HC9 Jan 2024/241/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowed a bail application filed by Surendra Rawat. The Court granted bail based on the principle of parity, noting that the co-accused was on bail and the applicant had no flight risk. Bail was granted with conditions regarding tampering and presence in court.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail requiring a personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions regarding witness tampering and court appearance.

Surendra Rawat @ Matru Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:2486

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 241 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Surendra Rawat @ Matru Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt. Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

Learned counsel for accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case as well as in the three cases mentioned in the gang chart. In all three cases mentioned in the gang chart, he has been released on bail. The bail order are on record as Annexure No. 3 and 5 to the bail application. Apart from the cases mentioned in the gang chart, there are two other cases pending against the accused applicant. Out of those two cases, in one case, final report has been filed and accordingly, the case has been consigned to record vide order dated 06.11.2020, copy of which is on record as Annexure No. 6. In the second case, the applicant has been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.02.2020, copy of which is on record as Annexure No. 7 to the petition.

¶8

It has been further submitted that the co-accused Karan Rawat who was having the identical role in the gang chart has been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.11.2023, copy of which is on record as Annexure No. 8 to the petition. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks parity with the order of the co-accused.

¶9

It has been further submitted that applicant is in jail since 10.05.2023 and if facility of bail is granted, there is no apprehension that he will flee from the judicial process and he will abide by the orders passed by the Court below and will cooperate in speedy trial of the case.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but has not disputed the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.

¶11

Considering the fact that in the cases mentioned in the gang

¶12

chart, he is on bail and he has explained criminal history of other two cases; co-accused Karan Rawat has been enlarge on bail and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, for the period for which he is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail on the ground of parity.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant, Surendra Rawat @ Matru, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 374/2023, under Sections 2/3 of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station - Gangaghat, District - Unnao, 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 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.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall submit an undertaking on affidavit in terms of Section 19 (4) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 that he will not indulge in any case for or misuse the liberty of bail.

¶20

(vi) 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

(vii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial

¶22

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.

¶23

Order Date :- 9.1.2024 R.C.

¶24

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

Surendra Rawat @ Matru v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Rawat @ Matru v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt.

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

Aamir Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Mohd. Waseem Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Sonu Hussain Alias Bakridi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

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

Annu @ Vimlesh Kumari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Civil Secrett. Lko.

Ambikeshwar Singh Alias Ambikeshwar Pratap Singh Alias Nandan Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home), Lucknow