14 May 2009
Supreme Court
Download

BADAL PATHAK Vs STATE OF U.P.

Case number: Crl.A. No.-001057-001057 / 2009
Diary number: 9667 / 2009
Advocates: JITENDRA KUMAR Vs


1

                IN THE  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA                 CRIMINAL  APPELLATE  JURISDICTION                                   CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.   1057    OF 2009   

 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 2590 of 2009)      

Badal Pathak ..   Appellant(s)

                    Versus

State of U.P. ..   Respondent(s)    

                                                      O R D E R

As per the office report, the petitioner has filed affidavit of dasti service of  

the show cause notice on Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, learned standing counsel for the  

State of Uttar Pradesh.  Despite service, no one has put in appearance on behalf of the  

State.   

Leave granted.

We have heard learned counsel for the appellant.

A limited challenge in this appeal is to the order, dated 4th March, 2009,  

passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Miscellaneous Bail  

Application No. 5855 of 2009, whereby the appellant has been directed to  furnish  a  

personal bond  and two local heavy sureties of Rs. 5,00,000/- each to the satisfaction  

of the concerned Court as a condition for grant of bail to the appellant.

..2/-

2

:2: Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the said condition is onerous  

and being a student it may not be possible for the appellant to comply with it with the  

result that he will not be able to avail of the benefit of the bail order.

It appears from the impugned order that the High Court has imposed the  

condition of two heavy sureties for the afore-mentioned amounts keeping in view the  

fact that the appellant hails from Bihar.  On this aspect, it is pointed out by learned  

counsel for the appellant that the real brother of the appellant, who is co-accused in  

the same case, has also been granted bail by the same High Court vide order dated  

6th May, 2008, but he has been directed to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 15,000/-  

with two sureties of the like amount.

Bearing  in  mind  all  these  facts  we  allow  the  appeal  and  direct  that  the  

appellant shall be admitted to bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.  

15,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

The appeal accordingly stands disposed of.      

                                       ...................J.            [ D.K. JAIN ]  

                                       ...................J.                                     [ R.M. LODHA  ] NEW DELHI, MAY 14, 2009.