Allowed

Anoop Gaud v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC17 May 2024BAIL/5374/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought bail in a FIR involving rioting, armed violence, and attempt to murder. The court granted bail relying on the principle of parity, noting that co-accused with an identical role had already been granted bail, despite the State opposing the initial plea.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to Anoop Gaud subject to furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties, and compliance with specific conditions regarding court appearance and conduct.

Anoop Gaud vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:44761

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5374 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Anoop Gaud Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- D.P. Dutt Tiwari,Rachana Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.112 of 2024 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 34, 286, 307, 323, 504, 506, 332, 353, 427, 436, 186, 188, 201 I.P.C. & Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act & Section 3/4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act and Section 3/27/30 of Arms Act, Police Station Lilapur, District Pratapgarh, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent person and he is in jail since 25.3.2024. He further submits that coaccused, Sachin Singh, Jai Karan Singh and Saurabh Singh having identical role, have already been granted bail by this Court, vide orders dated 20.6.2024, 21.6.2024 & 21.6.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 6660 of 2024, 6849 of 2024 & 6901 of 2024 (bail orders provided by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record). In these circumstances, the applicant is also entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of the applicant for grant of bail, but he conceded the fact that co-accused, Sachin Singh, Jai Karan Singh and Saurabh Singh have already been granted bail by this Court.

¶10

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of the F.I.R., other relevant documents,

¶11

bail order of the co-accused, Sachin Singh, Jai Karan Singh and Saurabh Singh, ground of parity as well as totality of fact and circumstances, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Let applicant - Anoop Gaud - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶14

(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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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 229-A IPC.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1)

¶19

opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 1.7.2024 Gaurav/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anoop Gaud v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anoop Gaud 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

Prem Chandra Verma and Another Vs Brigadier Akhil Dixit and Others

Masihul Haq Vs Smt. Neha Sharma District Magistrate Gonda and Another

Anil Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Ram Kishore @ Jugadi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home , Lucknow

Abhay Malik Vs Shashi Ranjan Kumar Rao, Managing Director U.P. Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Ltd. and Another

Smt. Rajmati Vs Sada Nand Saroj, S.D.M., Alapur Ambedkar Nagar