Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Anil Yadav vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 July, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30478 of 2019 Applicant :- Anil Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- R.P.S. Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 69 of 2019, under Sections 420, 120B I.P.C. and Section 5/7/10 U.P. Public Exam Act, 1998, P.S. Jangipur, district- Ghazipur, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.Offence is triable by the Magistrate. He further submitted that the offence which has been alleged to have been committed by the accused is punishable with less than seven years. Lastly, he submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 09.06.2019 and in case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused and considering the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2018(3) SCC 22 but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant, Anil Yadav be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in Case Crime No. 69 of 2019, under Sections 420, 120B I.P.C. and Section 5/7/10 U.P. Public Exam Act, 1998, P.S. Jangipur, district- Ghazipur subject to the following conditions:-
i) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicants shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicants shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
v) The applicants 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019 Ujjawal
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Anil Yadav vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 July, 2019
Judges
  • Ajit Singh
Advocates
  • R P S Chauhan