Allowed

Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P.

Bail – grant on parity

Allahabad HC24 Apr 2025BAIL/13581/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Krishan Pahal, J.), order dated 24.4.2025, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 13581 of 2025 — bail ALLOWED on ground of PARITY to applicant Rakesh Singh (State of U.P. opposite party) in Case Crime No. 59 of 2024, Sections 376 & 386 IPC, P.S. Asothar, District Fatehpur; custody since 3.3.2025; four-case criminal history explained (Goonda Act, S.110 IPC); co-accused Rahul Sin

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed to applicant Rakesh Singh on the ground of parity with co-accused Rahul Singh; release ordered upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to verific

Rakesh Singh vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:62117

¶2

Court No. - 65

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13581 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Rakesh Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manvendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri A.K. Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶9

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 59 of 2024, U/S 376, 386 IPC, Police Station Asothar, District Fatehpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶10

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person, Rahul Singh has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 24.7.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 24689 of 2024. The applicant is languishing in jail since 3.3.2025 having criminal history of four cases, which stands explained, as two of those cases are under Goonda Act and under Section 110 IPC and the period of extermination has already expired. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of the co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

¶11

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspect of parity to the coaccused and have not been disputed by him .

¶12

In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a

¶13

basis for refusal of bail.

¶14

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and in light of the judgement passed by this Court in Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Crl.L.J. 938 and the judgement passed by the Supreme Court in Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, MANU/SCOR/22410/2021, coupled with the judgment of Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another , reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 825 without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶15

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Rakesh Singh, who is involved in aforementioned case crime number 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶16

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. 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, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶20

Order Date :- 24.4.2025 Shalini

¶21

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Karan vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Faizan vs State of U.P.

Ashok Kumar Alias Devi Singh vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Kesari vs State of U.P.

Gopali vs State of U.P.

Ram Sharan Alias Bhure Pal vs State of U.P. and 3 Others