Allowed

Rijvendra Singh @ Arjun Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Allahabad HC3 Jul 2024BAIL/6928/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application where the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad granted bail to the applicant. The court found it fit to grant bail based on the fact that no specific role was assigned to the applicant and on the ground of parity with a co-accused already granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding appearance at court and no adjournments.

Rijvendra Singh @ Arjun Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:45183

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6928 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rijvendra Singh @ Arjun Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Ramakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in pursuance to the First Information Report registered as Case Crime No. 0068 of 2023, under Sections 323, 452, 307, 308, 506, 34, 325 I.P.C., Police Station - Kurebhar, District - Sultanpur.

¶8

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that according to first information report which was lodged by one Samar Bahadur Singh on 09.03.2023, under Sections 323, 452, 307, 308, 506, 34 I.P.C., Police Station - Kurebhar, District - Sultanpur, it is alleged that in the night of 08.03.2023, when the complainant was having dinner alongwith his son, number of persons alongwith the applicant entered into their house, who were armed with weapons, lathi and danda and the applicant was armed with iron rod, who started assaulting the injured persons. During the said incident Subhash Singh fell unconscious while Kamlesh Singh, Sandeep Singh and Mukesh Singh also received serious injuries on their body and were referred to district Hospital.

¶9

It is next submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant and general role has been assigned to all the accused persons. It is further submitted that cross first information report was lodged from the side of applicant by one Janardan Singh being Case Crime No. 72 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 34 I.P.C. It is stated that injuries were received to the side of applicant which has been demonstrated in the affidavit fiiled in support of bail application. It is further submitted that co-accused Ram Charan having similar role has already been granted bail by this Court vide its order dated 2.6.2023 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail

¶10

Application No.7339 of 2023 and on the ground of parity the present accused-applicant is also liable to be granted bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he has not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in the light of the fact that no specific role has been assigned to applicant and also on the ground of parity, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶13

Let applicant Rijvendra Singh @ Arjun Singh be released on bail in Case Crime No. 0068 of 2023, under Sections 323, 452, 307, 308, 506, 34, 325 I.P.C., Police Station - Kurebhar, District - Sultanpur, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :-

¶14

(i) 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.

¶15

(ii) 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.

¶16

(iii) 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.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and proceed against the applicant in accordance with law.

¶19

The application stands disposed of.

¶20

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶21

Order Date :- 3.7.2024 RKM.

¶22

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rijvendra Singh @ Arjun Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rijvendra Singh @ Arjun Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Civil Sectt. 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

Ved Prakash Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Revenue Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Ankit Kumar Agarwal Vs Deputy Registrar Firms, Societies and Chits,Ayodhya Division,Ayodhya and Another

Ankit Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy., Food and Civil Supply , Lucknow and Others

Rakshapal Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 11 Others

E-City Entertainment India Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Its Authorized Rpresentative vs Moksh Innovations Inc. a Sole Propriety Concern Thru. Proprietor, Mr. Akshay Kumar Thakur

Om Prakash and Another vs Deputy Director of Consolidation, Lakhimpur Kheri and Others