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

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:78450

Court No. - 28

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4759 of 2024

Applicant :- Sanjai Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Chandra,Monu Singh Yadav,Vishal Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶6

1. This is second application for bail moved on behalf of applicant- Sanjai as his first application for bail has been rejected by this court vide order dated 03.11.2023 passed in criminal misc. bail application no.6283 of 2023. Earlier vide order dated 9.5.2024, the present bail application was released by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Faiz Alam Khan , therefore, this present bail application has been placed before this Court.

¶7

2. Heard Sri Monu Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rakesh Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant Sanjai w ith a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.118 of 2022, under Sections 302, 308, 201, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Baddupur, District Barabanki.

¶9

4. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case with ulterior motive. The role of the present applicant is similar to role of the co-accused Shishu Pal, Kailash Chandra and Rambaili, who have been granted bail vide orders dated 16.3.2023, 24.3.2023 and 4.4.2023 respectively in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11223 of 2022, 14055 of 2022 and 881 of 2023, therefore, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 27.05.2022

¶10

5. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail, however, he does not dispute the fact that the case of the present applicant is similar to the aforesaid co-accused persons, who have been enlarged on bail.

¶11

6. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,

¶12

after hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking into the nature of the FIR and the fact that the co-accused having similar role have been granted bail, I am of the opinion that the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.

¶13

7. Let the applicant, Sanjai, be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶14

(i) 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.

¶15

(ii) 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.

¶16

(iii) 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.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.

¶18

8. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The Trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything in this order.

¶19

O rder Date :- 26.11.2024 Anu j Sing h

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sanjai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Saurabh Vishwakarma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Ranjna Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Mohammad Tayyab and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sanjai vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ravi Sharma vs State of U.P.Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Nisha vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Sectt. Lko