Allahabad High Court
Pintu @ Manvendra Pratap Singh Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home ... on 3 January, 2023
Author: Renu Agarwal
Bench: Renu Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 28 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5256 of 2022 Applicant :- Pintu @ Manvendra Pratap Singh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Devendra Pratap Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
The present application for bail has been filed seeking bail in Case Crime No. 661 of 2021 under Sections 408, 411 IPC Police Station Kakori District Lucknow.
Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case as a revenge of a hot exchange of words between the parties. No items were found missing from the car. The applicant does not have any criminal history prior to this case The applicant is languishing in jail since 14.12.2021 therefore, the accused-applicant may be enlarged on bail.
On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account that the FIR is the result of employer-employee relationship, no items were missing from the car which the applicant was driving, the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail.
Let applicant-Pintu @ Manvendra Pratap Singh Yadav be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-
(i) 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.
(ii) 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.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 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.
(v) The applicant shall also furnish an undertaking from the sureties that the properties (movable/immovable) which are the basis of accepting the surety, shall not be disposed of by them till the conclusion of trial.
(vi) The applicant shall also give an undertaking to the effect that he will not change his address without prior intimation to the trial court concerned.
(Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.) Order Date :- 3.1.2023 Nadeem