Allowed

Charan Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Aug 2018BAIL/23978/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 306 IPC, the High Court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, held that the applicant made out a fit case for bail pending trial while imposing strict conditions regarding absence and trial duration.

What did the court decide?

Applicant granted release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions of attendance and no adjournment seeking.

Charan Singh Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 54

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23978 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Charan Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Girish Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Pleadings have been exchanged between the parties.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶7

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no. 48 of 2018, under Section 306 IPC, P.S. Bahjoi, District- Sambhal, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his application for bail submits that the applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that the applicant is husband of the deceased. Though the FIR was registered under section 302 IPC but later on during investigation the case was converted under section 306 IPC and four persons were named in the FIR. During the course of investigation it has come out from the record that the deceased was a short tampered lady an on account of her behaviour, her parent-in-law resides separately. She was the mother of two kids and got married about 15 years back. Though, during investigation it has been come out from the record that there was constant quarrel between husband and wife and being a short and hot tampered lady, she has committed suicide. It is further submitted that there is no evidence of abetment by the applicant to the deceased to commit suicide. It is next submitted that the applicant is in jail since 08.02.2018 having no criminal antecedents except the present one.

¶9

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant Charan Singh , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the

¶12

like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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.

¶14

(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶15

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶16

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶17

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶18

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.

¶19

Order Date :- 27.8.2018 Nisha

Charan Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Charan Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Irshad Vs State of U.P.

Kunwar Singh @ Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Ayub Ali Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikas Bind Vs State of U.P.

Ram Ajor Vs State of U.P.

Krishna Kripal Sharma Vs State of U.P.