Criminal Misc. Bail Application filed by Banti @ Ajeet Kumar Dubey challenging detention after summons issued under revised charges including POCSO. Court allowed bail.
Application allowed; applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:29393
Court No. - 8
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1277 of 2024
Applicant :- Banti @ Ajeet Kumar Dubey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Gupta,Dinesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
granted to the applicant to appear before the court below and apply for bail. The court below was also directed for granting benefits of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amanpreet Singh Vs. C.B.I. through Director (Crl. Appeal No. 929 of 2021) . However, the application filed in pursuance of the said order was rejected by the court below and the applicant was taken into custody on 19.12.2023. It is lastly submitted that till today, only P.W. 1 has been examined and there is no possibility of conclusion of trial in near future. It is, thus, submitted that the applicant, who is in jail since 19.12.2023, is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the applicant will never misuse the liberty of bail and shall fully cooperate in the trial.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that investigation was conducted by the Investigating Officer at the initial stage under the influence of the accused persons and thereafter, on the request of the victim's side, the investigation was transferred to other Agency. However, he does not dispute the fact the fact that the applicant was enlarged on bail on 19.02.2020 and on the summons being issued, he appeared before the court on 19.12.2023.
19.02.2020. Thereafter, investigation was transferred and charge sheet was submitted in some added Sections.
In such circumstances, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
(i) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
(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 dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.
(iv) 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 229A IPC.
(v) 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. may be issued and if 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
IPC.
(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) 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.
Order Date :- 10.4.2024 VKS
Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail given the changed nature of the charge sheet after transfer of investigation and prior bail history.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Amanpreet Singh Vs. C.B.I.Referred¶9
Amanpreet Singh Vs. C.B.I.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Banti @ Ajeet Kumar Dubey
State Of U.P.
Rajeev Singh
Vivek Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
4 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
