Allowed

Satya Prakash Tiwari v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home, Lucknow

Allahabad HC25 Jun 2024BAIL/6576/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail sought by an accused charged under Sections 353, 386, 504 and 506 IPC for allegedly threatening a government informant and demanding money. The court noted the charge-sheet was filed, the applicant was in jail since April 2024, and no money or property had been delivered, and allowed bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties with conditions including non-tampering, non-intimidation and attendance at trial.

Satya Prakash Tiwari vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:50157

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6576 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Satya Prakash Tiwari Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home, Lucknow

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kewal Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record.

¶8

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

¶9

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.265 of 2024, under Sections 353, 386, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Balrampur.

¶10

It is alleged in the prosecution case that on 19.04.2024 applicant has made a call to the informant on his mobile and given threat to him for dire consequences. Applicant has also made calls by using several mobiles and given threat to the informant and further stated that the applicant demanded 1 lakh rupees per month and also stated that if you will not give the said money then I will not live you there and further the applicant started to destroy the government documents which were on the table then staff of the informant's removed the applicant from there and also stated that earlier to this applicant has given threat to the informant. It is further alleged that the applicant is a criminal person and also taking Theka patta. He continuously applied pressure upon the informant and also gave threat for dire consequences therefore the informant was afraid and he is

¶11

feeling very difficult to do his government job.

¶12

Learned counsel for applicant submits that no offence under Section 386 IPC is made out as the offence of extortion as defined under Section 383 IPC is missing. There is no delivery of any money or property, valuable security to the applicant by the informant. The charge-sheet has been filed. Applicant is in jail since 22.04.2024.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer.

¶14

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.04.2024, charge-sheet in the case has been filed as also the fact that there is no delivery of any money or property, valuable security to the applicant, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant Satya Prakash Tiwari be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(v) 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.

¶22

(vi) 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.

¶23

Order Date :- 24.7.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶24

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

Satya Prakash Tiwari v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home, Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satya Prakash Tiwari v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home, 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

Shakti Singh Alias Pankaj Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Akhilesh Dwivedi vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ajeet Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin.Secy. Home Deptt. and Another

Mahtab Alam vs Union of India Thru. Senior Intelligence Officer Directorate of Revenue, Intelligence Lko.

Ritanshu Maurya vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Sarvesh Saini vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko