Allowed

chandreshwar shah v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Mar 2018BAIL/3561/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 438 CrPC (implied context of 'personal bond') arising from interstate trafficking of sand and gravel, the High Court granted bail to the applicant on the condition of executing a personal bond and two sureties, noting the applicant's advanced age and inability to verify evidence after a long delay.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by executing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount, subject to conditions of personal appearance and no tampering with evidence.

chandreshwar shah Vs State of U.P. — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3561 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Chandreshwar Shah Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Nath Chaubey,Gaurav Kakkar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Gaurav Kakkar, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State- respondents and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in S.S.T. No. 01 of 2011 arising out of Case Crime no. 26 of 2007, u/s 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 109 IPC and section 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S. Rasoolabad, District Kanpur Dehat with the prayer for enlarging him on bail.

¶7

Submission of counsel for the applicant is that the applicant was working as technical assistant in soil conservation department. The incident relates to the year 1995-96 and the applicant retired in the year 2000 and thereafter F.I.R. was lodged in the year 2007 with the allegation that the hedging, which was not done, for which amount was disbursed illegally. There were contradictory statements of the villagers with regard to work done under the supervision of the applicant, final report was submitted in December, 2007, against which, protest petition was filed in the year 2010 and the applicant was summoned. Learned counsel submitted that it was not practically possible to assess about the work done after 12 years of raising of hedging. Lastly he submitted that the applicant had retired long time back and he at present is aged about 76 years, there is no likelihood of tempering the prosecution evidence. He is in jail since 6.12.2017.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. However he could not rebut the submission made by counsel for the applicant.

¶9

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Let the applicant Chandreshwar Shah, involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-

¶11

(1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶12

(2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date in the court and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.

¶13

It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.

¶14

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶15

Order Date :- 8.3.2018 Dhirendra/

chandreshwar shah v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

chandreshwar shah 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kallu Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Bhola Vs State of Up

Noori@ Noor Hasan and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Sameer Vs State of U.P.

Deshbandhu Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Rizwan @ Kala and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another