Allowed

Laek Beg v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2018BAIL/46666/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In bail application No. 46666 of 2018, this Court granted bail to Laek Beg charged under Sections 147, 364, 302, 201, and 120-B IPC. The Court allowed release on a personal bond and two local sureties under specific conditions regarding court presence and witness protection.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties under specified conditions regarding court attendance and witness safety.

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

¶1

Court No. - 12

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46666 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Laek Beg Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Tiwari,Sonu Kumar Tiwari

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶6

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

¶7

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is wholly innocent and he has been falsely implicated only due to conspiracy of village pradhan. The applicant is not named in the first information report and his name surfaced on the basis of application dated 12.6.2018 given by first informant. It is next contended that the no specific role has been assigned to the applicant and nothing incriminating has been recovered from his possession. It is next contended that the applicant does not has any criminal history and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is contended that co-accused, namely, Mansoor having an identical role, has already been granted bail by this Court on 8.10.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 37627 of 2018. It is next contended that there are no chances of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. It is next contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail 12.9.2018 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, let the applicant Laek Beg involved in case crime No. 388 of 2018, under Sections 147, 364, 302, 201, 120-B IPC, police station Akrabad, District Aligarh be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:-

¶10

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he

¶11

shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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 him in accordance with law.

¶15

However, It is made clear that in case the applicant indulges in intimidating or threatening any witness, the State or Prosecutor would be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 6.12.2018 Arvind

Laek Beg v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laek Beg 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

Lakhanchi Khatik Vs State of U.P.

Balwant Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others

Ram Awadh Vs State of U.P.

Satendra Vs State of U.P.

Ashok Vs State of U.P.

Ranjeev Thakur and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another