Allowed

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

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2024/9958/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9958 of 2024 was allowed. The court granted bail to the applicant despite opposition from the State, noting that a co-accused on similar allegations had already been enlarged on bail and the applicant had no criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Ramu was released on bail in FIR No. 263 of 2024 by executing personal bonds and two sureties of Rs. 20,000/- each with specified conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:64604

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9958 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ramu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

2 . The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.263 of 2024, under Section 70(1) BNS, Police Station Shivgarh, District Raebareli.

¶8

3 . It is argued by the Counsel for the applicant that the co-accused Rohit Kumar has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders passed today.

¶9

4 . Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer.

¶10

5. Considering the fact that the co-accused on similar allegations has been enlarged on bail vide orders passed today in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.9848 of 2024 coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 14.07.2024, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶11

6. Let the applicant Ramu be released on bail in the abovesaid 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:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

(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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

Order Date :- 19.9.2024 akverma

¶16

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Anuj Sahu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Amit Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Salman Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mahaveer @ Rajhans Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Manju Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

M/S Krishna Steels Thru. Proprietor Pramod Kumar vs Commissioner Commerical Tax Lko