Allowed

Uday v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Aug 2018BAIL/29410/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the Single Judge of Uttar Pradesh High Court considered submissions from the applicant and the State. Without expressing an opinion on the merits, the court relied on an Apex Court precedent to grant bail by order dated 6.8.2018.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with strict conditions regarding cooperation in trial and abstinence from further crime.

Uday Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29410 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Uday Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Uday with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 143 of 2014, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Chhata, District- Mathura, during pendency of trial.

¶7

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that by concocting a Will executed by the husband of the informant in favour of the applicant, sale deed has been executed by the applicant. The husband of the informant has not died and the Will has been registered on 15.2.2008 in a fraudulent manner. The statements of scribe of the Will, clerk of the Sub Registrar Office and statement of Gram Panchayat Adhikari have been brought on record, who have stated that the Will was validly executed. The husband of the informant is missing for the last 10 years and no one knows about him. The Will was duly registered in accordance with law. The allegations against the applicant in the First Information Report are not correct. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.5.2018. He does not have any criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Having considered the submissions of the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant Uday involved in the aforesaid crime be released on

¶10

bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶15

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶16

Order Date :- 6.8.2018 Ruchi Agrahari

Uday v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uday 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Shakeel Vs State of U.P. and Others

Saleem Vs State of U.P.

Balveer Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mushahid Vs State of U.P.

Diggo @ Digambar Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Shabanam Vs State of U.P. and Others