Allowed

Ajay @ Laddu v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2024ABAIL/11330/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad granted anticipatory bail to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C., noting that the applicant was falsely implicated by co-accused without any injury occurring during the alleged incident.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties, subject to specified conditions including cooperation with investigation and surrender of passport.

Ajay @ Laddu vs State of Up and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:188476

¶2

Court No. - 67

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11330 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ajay @ Laddu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajai Mani Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State- opposite party no. 1, and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

This application under section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 248 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Baldev, District Mathura.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused persons, who were arrested at the spot. The said statements insofar as they implicate the applicant are unreliable. In the alleged incident no person has received any injury. No medical report is available on the record. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para no. 15 of the bail application. The investigation is still pending and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above case.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations, in particular, the fact that the name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused persons, who were arrested at the spot, and in the alleged incident no person has received any injury, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶11

In the event of arrest, the applicant- Ajay @ Laddu , involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;

¶13

(ii) 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

¶14

dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court;

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court;

¶17

(v) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant;

¶18

(vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98 ; and,

¶19

(vii) 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

Further, in default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

¶21

The application stands disposed of.

¶22

Order Date :- 2.12.2024 Sachin Mishra

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ajay @ Laddu v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay @ Laddu v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hafiz Swale Hasan Imam @ Sahel Hasan vs State of Up and 3 Others

Rahul Yadav vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ashok Mishra and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Deepak Nagoriya and 2 Others vs State of U.P.

Mahtab Ahmad vs State of Up

Sabir and Another vs State of U.P. and Another