Allowed

Vijay Tiwari @ Laddu v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2024BAIL/9234/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed bail to Vijay Tiwari in an axe-lathi assault case. The court found no cogent evidence and noted the applicant's general role, lack of prior record, and undertaking to cooperate. Bail granted on personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding presence in court and non-tampering with evidence.

Vijay Tiwari @ Laddu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:82156

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9234 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vijay Tiwari @ Laddu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Pratap Singh,Chandan Srivastava,Lavkush Yadav,Rajendra Pratap Singh,Yogesh Somvanshi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raj Kumar Mishra,Vinay Mishra

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in FIR/Case Crime No. 89 of 2024, under Sections 323, 326, 352, 308 and 307 IPC, Police Station Saangipur, District Pratapgarh.

¶8

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated due to ulterior motive. He submits that the general role has been assigned in the narration of the First Information Report to the present applicant including one other co-accused for attacking with Axe and Lathi. He added that it has been alleged that one of the co-accused opened fire but the Investigating Officer, without collecting cogent piece of evidence, has filed the chargesheet. Further there is no complaint that the applicant has ever been absconded from investigation proceeding. He also submits that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he has no previous criminal history and is languishing in jail since 10.07.2024. He submits that the applicant undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Thus, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶9

Per contra, learned learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the First Information Report and even the specific role has been assigned by the injured for attacking with 'lathi' and there are injures of lacerated wounds and as such, the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Learned counsel for the State has also supported the version of learned counsel for the complainant.

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that general role has been assigned to the applicant including one co-accused person; there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant; the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 10.07.2024, coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted and he will always cooperate with the trial proceedings.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

¶12

Let the applicant- Vijay Tiwari @ Laddu involved in the aforementioned crime 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:-

¶13

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶14

(2) 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. He 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;

¶15

(3) 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.; and

¶16

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be

¶18

verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶19

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.

¶20

Order Date :- 9.12.2024 kkv/

¶21

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

Vijay Tiwari @ Laddu v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Tiwari @ Laddu v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home 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

Satish Chandra @ Chhotey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Guddu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Beeran Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Suresh Chandra vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 2 Others

Raghvendra Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.