Allowed

Jairam Rajpoot v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Allahabad HC3 Sept 2024/9371/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under BNS sections 331/305/317, the court found it a fit case to enlarge the applicant on bail despite criminal antecedents and some procedural inconsistencies, due to no likelihood of absconding. The court imposed standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed with personal bond and two sureties; conditions imposed against tampering with evidence or witnesses and attendance in court.

Jairam Rajpoot Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:60519

¶2

Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9371 of 2024 Applicant :- Jairam Rajpoot Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar,Chandra Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶5

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 06.04.2024, some unknown persons have stolen Rs. 1,00,000/- cash and some coupons as well as other material of departmental store of the complainant.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that FIR has been lodged after a delay of two days. The incident is of 06.07.2024. The applicant was arrested on 08.07.2024, however, he has been shown to be arrested on 17.07.2024. The alleged recovery shown from the applicant is false. The prosecution case is highly improbable. The applicant has explained his criminal history of seven cases in para 17 of the bail application. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.07.2024.

¶7

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

On due consideration to the delay in lodging the FIR; the applicant has explained his criminal antecedent, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.07.2024 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I

¶10

find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant, Jairam Rajpoot, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 285/2024 under Sections 331(4)/305/317(2) of BNS, Police Station - Isanagar, District - Lakhimpur Kheri, 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:-

¶12

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶13

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(v) 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.

¶17

(vi) 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.

¶18

Order Date :- 3.9.2024/R.C.

¶19

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

Jairam Rajpoot v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jairam Rajpoot v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

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. Rupa Samajdar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Mamta Sinha Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. / Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Firoj Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

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

Jairam Rajpoot vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Padma Jaiswal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another