Back
SUBHASH VIDYARTHI
Rakesh Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. bail application details and f.i.r. summary. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. defendant's previous case and circumstances. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's consideration for bail. (Para 7) |
| 4. grant of bail and conditions. (Para 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT
Subhash Vidyarthi, J.
Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Yadav, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ramji, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.
2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 360 of 2020, under Section 409 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali City, District Hardoi.
3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 09.07.2020 alleging that the applicant was working as an Accountant in Hardoi Treasury and during an enquiry regarding some files regarding payments of pension of former employees having gone missing between the period 2009 to 2016 the applicant admitted that he had removed the files after breaking upon the locks of the almiras.
4. In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. Earlier the applicant was implicate
The court may grant bail based on the assertion of innocence and lack of dispute from the opposing counsel, without affecting the merits of the case.
The circumstances of the case, lack of recovery of stolen articles, and delay in implicating the applicant were key factors in granting bail.
The court has the discretion to grant bail based on the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the duration of custody and the applicant's role as the sole bread earner of his family.
The economic offence of having deep routed conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds, needs to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economic of the country, a....
Petitioner’s role in alleged offence, fact that till date no amount has been recovered from petitioner and in case petitioner, at this stage, is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with prosecution evide....
Larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and dictum of Apex Court in Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 have been taken into account to make a c....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
