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

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8564

Court No. - 16

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1196 of 2025

Applicant :- Darbari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Awasthi,Ashish Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that name of the applicant has surfaced in the confessional statement of Jhabbu who has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 01.07.2019 passed in criminal misc. bail application No. 6070/2019. The applicant has not been caught from the spot. Offences are triable by magistrate. Learned counsel for the applicant has explained criminal antecedent of the applicant in para 22 of the bail application.

¶8

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

On due consideration to the order of co-accused Jhabbu in whose confessional statement name of the applicant has surfaced; offences are triable by magistrate; he is languishing in jail since 30.12.2024 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the

¶11

applicant on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant Darbari involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 01/2019-20, under Sections 9/51(1C), 27/51(1C), 31/51(1C), 35(6)/51(1C)/48A/51(C) of the Wild Life Protection Act and Section 26 of Indian Forest Act, Police Station - South Sonaripur, District - Kheri, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

Order Date :- 11.2.2025 R.C.

¶21

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

Darbari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Darbari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shlpa Verma and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Rahul Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Nawab Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Satyam Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sunil Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Jairam Singh Bhadauria Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others