Allowed

Dhiraj Bahadur Singh Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC13 Feb 2024BAIL/1284/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of an accused facing charges under Sections 34, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. The court noted that the charge-sheet was filed, the applicant had been in jail since 2022, and bail had been granted in several identical cases involving the same parties.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence, seeking adjournments, and committing crimes.

Dhiraj Bahadur Singh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:13108

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1284 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Dhiraj Bahadur Singh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar,Ajay Deep Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter, including upto date case diary of the case and, charge-sheet in this case has already been filed.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Dhiraj Bahadur Singh Yadav for grant of bail, in Case Crime No.0384 of 2021, under Sections 34, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., Police Station Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow, during trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution. So far as the company, namely, Vishwas Trading Company Pvt. Ltd is concerned, the applicant was not having any concern with the same and no specific allegation of taking money has been levelled against the applicant in the FIR which has been lodged against seven named accused persons, including the applicant. The applicant was not having any key position or managerial position in the company and he was not the director of the same. It is vehemently submitted that the applicant himself is a victim as his-own money has been misappropriated by the co-accused persons who were managing the company at the relevant point of time. In this regard an information obtained through RTI placed on record at page-41 of the paper-book (Annexure-5 to the bail application) has been highlighted in order to show that in lieu of the money given by the applicant to the co-accused persons he was inducted into Vishwas Trading Company (not in Vishwas Trading Company Pvt. Ltd) which was dealing with the business of soap manufacturing and was not at all connected with Vishwas Trading Company Pvt Ltd pertaining to which the

¶10

instant FIR has been lodged. It is further submitted that thirty six identical FIRs have been lodged against the applicant and out of these thirty-six cases of identical nature, in six cases he has been granted bail by the coordinate bench of this court, while in one case, he has been granted bail by the trial Court concerned and copies of five bail orders are placed on record collectively as Annexure No.9 to the bail application and one bail order of this Court of date 06.02.2024 is placed for perusal. The applicant is languishing in jail in this case since 27.01.2022. Charge-sheet in this case has already been submitted and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that the applicant is accused of committing an heinous offence and having regard to his long criminal history, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is reflected that the applicant is detained in prison in this case since 27.01.2022. He is involved in thirty cases of identical nature. Out of these thirty six cases, in six cases he has been granted bail by this Court as well as the coordinate bench of this court and in one case he has been granted bail by the trial Court concerned. Various submissions have been raised by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant in order to show that the applicant was not connected with the management of the company pertaining to which the FIR has been lodged in this case. The presence of the applicant may be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions.

¶13

In result, the instant bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶14

Let the accused/applicant- Dhiraj Bahadur Singh Yadav , involved in above-mentioned case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶20

Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case.

¶21

Order Date :- 13.2.2024 MVS/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dhiraj Bahadur Singh Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhiraj Bahadur Singh Yadav 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

Ashish Kumar Tripathi Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and Another

Ajeet Kumar Gupta @ Ajeet Gupta Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Secrt. Home Deptt. Lko.

Monu Tiwari @ Rohit Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 4 Others

Nisar Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Arun Kumar Singh and Another Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Dhiraj Bahadur Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.