Allowed

Rajendra Prasad Mishra v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Allahabad HC10 Jan 2024BAIL/298/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed the bail application of the applicant, Rajendra Prasad Mishra, on the grounds of parity with several co-accused persons in the same case who had already been granted bail. The court imposed standard bail conditions while declining to express an opinion on the merits of the charge.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount, subject to specific conditions.

Rajendra Prasad Mishra vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:11383

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 298 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rajendra Prasad Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Secrt. Lko.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Bajpai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

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

¶8

Learned counsel for accused-applicant submits that co-accused Abhishek Kumar Upadhyay against whom there was a criminal history of several cases has been enlarged on bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.11.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.11520 of 2023. Applicant has also explained his criminal history in para 9 of the bail application. He submits that other co-accused persons namely Yashwant Rawat, Chandan Yadav @ Sonu, Naved Ahmad, Omprakash and Arvind Singh have also been enlarged on bail by Co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 25.07.2023, 21.09.2023, 19.10.2023, 26.06.2023 & 03.03.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.9328 of 2023, 11389 of 2023, 12517 of 2023, 7816 of 2023 & 3330 of 2023 respectively. Applicant seeks parity with the bail orders of aforesaid co-accused persons.

¶9

It has been further submitted that applicant is in jail since 31.10.2022 and if facility of bail is granted, there is no apprehension that he will flee from the judicial process and he will abide by the orders passed by the Court below and will co-

¶10

operate in speedy trial of the case.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail however, does not dispute that its a case of parity.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the bail order of the Abhishek Kumar Upadhyay (supra) as well as other accused persons named above who have been enlarged on bail, period of incarceration gone into by the applicant and the fact that applicant seeks parity with the bail orders of aforesaid coaccused persons, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the grounds of parity.

¶14

Let the applicant, Rajendra Prasad Mishra involved in Case Crime No.0369 of 2022, under Sections 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station - Masauli District - Barabanki be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶17

(iii) 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.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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. (v) The applicant shall submit an undertaking on affidavit in terms of Section 19 (4) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 that he will not indulge in any case for or misuse the liberty of bail.

¶19

(vi) 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 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(vii) 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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

Order Date :- 6.2.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rajendra Prasad Mishra v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Prasad Mishra v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Secrt. 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

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

Surendra Rawat @ Matru Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt.

Annu @ Vimlesh Kumari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Civil Secrett. Lko.

Pawan Rathore and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Jamal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Ashish Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.