Allowed

Lalji Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Sept 2024ABAIL/8088/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a cow slaughter case where his implication relied solely on a co-accused's statement. The court acknowledged his criminal history but held the apprehension of arrest was reasonable. Bail allowed till trial conclusion subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed till conclusion of trial on a personal bond with two sureties, subject to standard conditions including appearance, non-tampering, and no emigration without permission.

Lalji Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:180854

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8088 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Lalji Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ratnesh Kumar Jaiswal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record.

¶7

Sri Rajiv Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, the instant anticipatory bail application may be finally, disposed off.

¶8

Heard Sri Ratnesh Kumar Jaiswal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajiv Dhar Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

¶9

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 23 of 2024, under Sections 429 IPC and 3/5A/8 Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Ramnagar, District Varanasi, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, till the conclusion of trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however, applicant was named in the FIR but from perusal of the FIR it reflects that applicant has been made accused in the present case on the basis of statement of co-accused Mohd. Hifazat Khan who was arrested at spot and except the statement of the co-accused there is no other cogent evidence against the applicant on record.

¶11

He further submitted that actually applicant is having criminal history of seven other cases including two cases of Cow Slaughter Act and only due to previous criminal history, police implicated him in the present matter through the statement of co-accused. He further submitted that entire criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para-3 to the supplementary affidavit filed in support to the instant bail application.

¶12

He further submitted that investigation of the case is still pending and police is trying to arrest the applicant.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of seven other cases including two cases of Cow Slaughter Act but could not dispute the fact that the name of the applicant was disclosed in the present matter through the statement of the co-accused who was arrested at spot.

¶14

I have heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the record of the case.

¶15

From the record, it reflects that applicant has been made accused in the present matter on the basis of statement of coaccused and except the statement of co-accused it appears that there is no other cogent evidence against the applicant on record.

¶16

Further, however, it reflects that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of seven other cases including two cases of Cow Slaughter Act but considering the criminal history of the applicant, argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that only due to previous criminal history, applicant has been made accused in the present matter through the statement of co-accused, cannot be ruled out, at this stage.

¶17

Further, considering the fact that investigation with regard to the applicant is still pending, apprehension of arrest raised by applicant, cannot be disbelieved.

¶18

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in this case, till conclusion of trial.

¶19

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶20

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Lalji Yadav, involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶21

i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶22

ii. that 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;

¶23

iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶24

iv. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶25

v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶26

vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶27

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶28

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶29

Order Date :- 19.11.2024

¶30

Ankita

¶31

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lalji Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalji Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

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 Meera and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Smt Pooja vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Tahir Hussain and 4 Others vs State of Up and Another

Mukesh Kumar Jaiswal vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Indrajeet and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another

Guddu @ Upendra Kumar vs State of U.P.