Allowed

Vijay @ Jhabre v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Hime Lko and Another

Allahabad HC19 Sept 2024BAIL/9928/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Criminal Misc. Bail Application under Section 376 IPC, the Allahabad High Court allowed bail to the applicant who was a co-accused alongside one person charged with rape and others with assault/general allegations. Relying on principles of parity since a co-accused received bail and the charge-sheet having been filed, the court granted bail subject to strict conditions including personal bond

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with conditions regarding presence in court, non-prosecution, and cooperation in trial proceedings.

Vijay @ Jhabre vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:75443

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9928 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vijay @ Jhabre Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Hime Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar Pandey,Dharm Raj Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Tripathi,Raghvendra Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

1. Heard Sri D.R. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vivek Gupta, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Sri Raghvendra Singh, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Anil K. Tripathi, learned counsel for the complainant/ informant.

¶7

2. Sri Raghvendra Singh, learned counsel for the complainant/ informant has filed the supplementary counter affidavit and Sri D.R. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant has filed the rejoinder affidavit, today in the Court, the same are taken on record.

¶8

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Vijay @ Jhabre) is languishing in jail since 28.08.2024 in Complaint Case No.8070 of 2023, under Section 376 I.P.C., Police Station-Malhipur, District-Shrawasti.

¶9

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has falsely been implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story.

¶10

5. Attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.1 of the bail application, which is a complaint being filed by the prosecutrix against five persons, namely, Gurudev @ Sukai, Vijay @ Jhabre, Kandhai Lal @ Nankey, Pramod @ Nikku and Pintu.

¶11

6. Further attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.16 of the bail application which is a bail order dated 10.05.2024 granted to the co-accused Pramod @ Nikku passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4711 of 2024; Pramod alias Nikku vs. State of U.P. & others.

¶12

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that general allegations have been levelled against the co-accused No.2 to 5, however, the specific allegation of rape has been levelled against the co-accused, Gurudev @ Sukai. The other coaccused have been attributed the role of assault and catching hold of the victim. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicant has stated that since the co-accused, Pramod @ Nikku has been granted bail vide order dated 10.05.2024 (supra), the present applicant may also be enlarged on bail on the basis of principles of parity.

¶13

8. Learned counsel for the complainant/ informant has drawn attention of this Court towards para-43 of the bail application, wherein the applicant has disclosed the facts that one more F.I.R. has been lodged against him bearing Case Crime No.204 of 2024, under Sections 323, 504 & 506 I.P.C., Police StationItyathok, District-Gonda in which the charge-sheet has been filed.

¶14

9. Sri Raghvendra Singh has further submitted that the informant is receiving threat from the accused persons and the informant is apprehensive to the effect that if the present applicant comes out from the jail, he shall again torture her and her family members.

¶15

10. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that since the charge-sheet has been filed in this case, therefore, if the present applicant is released on bail he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly.

¶16

Learned Additional Government Advocate as well as learned counsel for the complainant/ informant have opposed the prayer for bail of the present applicant, but they could not dispute the aforesaid factual contention of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶17

12. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that general allegations have been levelled against the accused No.2 to 5 and the specific allegation of rape has been levelled against the co-accused Gurudev @ Sukai; the co-accused Pramod @ Nikku has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 10.05.2024 (supra) and the undertaking that the present applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings properly, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the present applicant may be released on bail.

¶18

13. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶19

14. Let the applicant (Vijay @ Jhabre) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:-

¶20

(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.

¶21

(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.

¶22

(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.

¶23

(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. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

¶24

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶25

Order Date :- 14.11.2024 Suresh/

¶26

Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Vijay @ Jhabre v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Hime Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay @ Jhabre v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Hime Lko and Another

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

Ram Narayan Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home and Ors.

Alkesh vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rameshwar Kumar Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Irrigation and Water Resources Lko. and 2 Others

Shiv Shankar Lal Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Up Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko. and 2 Others

Kamlesh Kumari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Medical and Health Lko. and 3 Others

Salikram Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 4 Others