Allowed

Rahul Jatav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Feb 2025BAIL/1500/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to Rahul Jatav in a criminal trial pending case. The court noted the applicant was absent from the initial FIR, the impugned vehicle was not used in the offence, and co-accused was released. Anticipating a trial delay due to lack of witnesses, the court allowed bail subject to sureties and conditions against tampering.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to appearing at trial dates and not tampering with evidence or pressuring witnesses.

Rahul Jatav vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:15256

¶2

Court No. - 67

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1500 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Rahul Jatav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jyoti Singh,Vijit Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-respondent and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 593 of 2024, under Sections 303(2), 317(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3) BNS, Police Station Gursahaiganj, District Kannauj, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant was arrested on 28.09.2024. At the time of arrest, the applicant was driving the pick-up vehicle bearing registration No. UP 86AT 2241 and coaccused Mohd. Sakir was sitting in the said vehicle. The said vehicle was not connected with the offence in question. The coaccused Mohd. Sakir has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 06.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 43873 of 2024. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 15 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 28.09.2024 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not named in the first information report. At the time of arrest the applicant was driving the pick-up vehicle bearing registration No. UP 86AT 2241 and co-accused Mohd. Sakir was sitting in the said vehicle. The recovered vehicle was not connected with the offence. The co-accused Mohd. Sakir has been granted bail by this Court.

¶11

Further, the applicant has remained confined for more than four months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

Let the applicant Rahul Jatav involved in the aforesaid case 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 the conditions that he:

¶13

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶14

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶15

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶17

Order Date :- 4.2.2025 Lbm/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul Jatav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Jatav 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Munna Alias Parvez vs State of U.P. and Another

Kripa Shankar Bind vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Kishan @ Bantoo vs State of U.P.

Sanavvar vs State of U.P.

Brijesh Kumar @ Ulfat vs State of U.P.

Ambika Patel vs State of U.P.