Allowed

Prateek Verma @ Raj Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko.

Allahabad HC31 May 2024/6042/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowed a bail application filed by Prateek Verma. Based on the principle of parity, the court granted bail after noting that a co-accused with an identical role had already been granted bail by this court. Multiple conditions were imposed regarding attendance and conduct during the trial.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding court attendance and prohibition of adjournment seeking.

Prateek Verma @ Raj Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:42033

¶2

Court No. - 28

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6042 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Prateek Verma @ Raj Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajdeep Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.395 of 2020 under Section 304 IPC, Police Station Gusaiganj, District Sultanpur.

¶8

3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that co-accused Pramod Verma has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench this Court vide order dated 01.08.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 621 of 2023. He also submitted that case of the applicant is at par with the aforesaid co-accused Pramad Verma; thus, the applicant may also be granted bail on the ground of parity. Learned counsel for the applicant has pressed the grounds which are taken in the bail application of co-accused Promod Verma. The applicant has no previous criminal history and he is in jail since 18.04.2024.

¶9

4. Learned A.G.A. though opposed the prayer for bail but not disputed the fact that the case of the applicant is at par with the case of co-accused, Pramod Verma and his role is identical to that of co-accused.

¶10

5. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and after hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking into overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as the argument that the co-accused Pramod Verma having similar role has already granted bail by this Court, therefore, I am of the opinion that applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.

¶11

6. The bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶12

7. Let applicant, namely, Prateek Verma @ Raj Verma , 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 :-

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

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.

¶18

(Brij Raj Singh, J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 31.5.2024 dk/

¶20

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

Prateek Verma @ Raj Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prateek Verma @ Raj Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. 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

Mubarak Ali vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Ranjana Verma and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Another

Jitendra Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Lahri and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Satyam Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Manjeet Saroj vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another