Allowed

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

Allahabad HC20 Jan 2025BAIL/485/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application by applicant implicated in theft and criminal breach of trust of a tractor, offences triable by magistrate. Court noted parity with co-accused granted bail and lack of independent witness to recovery, and allowed bail with conditions against tampering and witness intimidation.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each, with standard conditions.

Guddu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:3437

¶2

Court No. - 16 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 485 of 2025 Applicant :- Guddu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶4

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

¶5

It is alleged in the prosecution case that on 18.4.2024, the coaccused Ramesh and Ramji took tractor of the applicant for bringing wheat crop to his home. However, after refilling the tractor on the way at Shahid Diwakar Filling Station, they fled away with the tractor.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not caught from the spot. Co-accused Dayashankar Bharti has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 26.07.2024 passed in criminal misc. bail application No. 6903/2024. He seeks parity with the order of co-accused.

¶7

It has been further submitted that the offences are triable by magistrate. The applicant is languishing in jail since 26.04.2025. 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.

¶8

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.

¶9

On due consideration to the fact that the offences are triable by magistrate; name of the applicant has been shown during false recovery of a tractor to which there is no independent witness, so also the the order of co-accused Dayashankar Bharti and

¶10

without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶12

Let the applicant Guddu, involved in Case Crime No. 165/2024, under Sections 406/420/411/120-B IPC, Police Station - Gosainganj, District - Sultanpur, 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:-

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

Order Date :- 20.1.2025/R.C.

¶20

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Nirmal Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. to the Govt. Deptt. of Home, Lko. U.P. and 4 Others

Shivnath Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Dayaram and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Jitendra Kanaujiya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

X Juvenile Thru. His Paternal Uncle Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Shiv Kumar Soni Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Amethi and Another