Allowed

Ajeet v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2024BAIL/2554/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of the accused in an FIR under Sections 498A and 302 IPC. Relying on parity with a co-accused who was earlier granted bail and noting the applicant's long custody and clean record, the court released him on personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties.

Ajeet vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:23709

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2554 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ajeet Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Vineet Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶7

2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.681 of 2020, under Section 498A, 302 IPC, P.S. Shahbad, District Hardoi.

¶8

3. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that the role assigned to the applicant in the FIR and in terms of the dying declaration was similar to the co-accused Smt. Rajni who was enlarged on bail vide order dated 08.02.2024. While passing the said order, the Court had taken into account the fact that the Naib Tehsildar before whom the dying declaration was recorded was not arrayed as a prosecution witness, the applicant was a lady and was in custody since 29.12.2020 and only two of the witnesses have been examined so far.

¶9

4. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that till date four witnesses have been examined and there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future and the applicant is in custody since 29.12.2020 having no criminal antecedents.

¶10

5. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶11

6. Considering and adopting the reasoning as contained in the order dated 08.02.2024 and prima-facie finding that although the name of the applicant surfaces in the dying declaration, he has spent more than three and a half year in custody, he has no criminal antecedents and there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future, as such, on the ground of part parity, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶12

7. Let the applicant Ajeet be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

(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.

¶16

8. However, it is directed that the trial shall be expedited without giving any unnecessary adjournments to any of the parties and the Superintendent of Police, Hardoi shall ensure that the witnesses are produced before the trial Court without any delay.

¶17

Order Date :- 19.3.2024 nishant

¶18

Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ajeet v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajeet v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

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

Karan Pasi vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home Department Civil Secretariat, Lucknow

Dipu vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Arshad vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Kanhaiya Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Revenue Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Bheem Sen vs Bano and 2 Others

Sanjay Dwivedi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others