Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 105713 (ALL)

DHARMENDRA BHARTI v. State of U.P.

BAIL/39753/2024 · 2025-04-30

Gautam Chowdhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39753 of 2024 Applicant :- Dharmendra Bharti Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material brought on record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the instant case, initially the applicant was granted bail in the present case on 09.01.2012. The applicant was continuously appearing before the trial court on each and every date fixed upto 10.08.2015. On 18.04.2016 non bailable warrant was issued against the applicant, against which applicant filed recall application on 03.09.2024 which was rejected by the court concerned and he was sent to jail. Learned counsel further submits that reason for non appearing in the concerned trial court is that applicant was confined in jail with regard to other criminal cases in District Chandauli, therefore, he could not appear and non bailable warrant was issued against him. He further submits that the applicant had not deliberately absconded from the judicial proceedings and undertakes that he shall not repeat the same in future. Lastly, it was submitted that the applicant is in judicial custody since 03.09.2024 and in case, applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 3. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. 4. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed. 5. Let the applicant-Dharmendra Bharti, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 229 of 2011, under Section 395 I.P.C., Police Station- Ahraura, District- Mirzapur, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. vi) Trial court is directed to make all possible efforts/ endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously. vii) The applicant is directed to appear before the concerned police station on the first day of every calendar month. 6. In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the informant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court. Order Date :- 1.5.2025 Mustaqeem. Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad