Allowed

Uttam Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 May 2019BAIL/18832/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court considered a bail application in a theft case. Recognizing concerns about false implication and lack of identifying marks on stolen items, the court granted bail subject to standard conditions of appearance and non-interference with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on personal bond and two sureties on conditions of non-tampering, no criminal activity, no witness intimidation, and regular appearance.

Uttam Singh Vs State of U.P. — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18832 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Uttam Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Wahid Jamal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

By means of this application the applicant Uttam Singh has prayed to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 856 of 2017, u/s 457, 380, 411 I.P.C., P.S. Sasni, District Hathras.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA representing the State. Perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number. It was a report against unknown persons for a theft of a brief case, having Rs. 3 lacs in it and two pair of Payal (anklet) with a purse having Rs. 7,000/-, in it. There was no specific mark of identity of this alleged stolen articles. Whereas accused applicant apprehended in police firing case, in which Rs. 7,100/-, said to be recovered from his possession. This recovery is being admitted to be of applicant. He explained his criminal history out of which ten cases were planted at the time of recovery. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶8

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶9

Perusal of report reveals that it was against unknown thieves and accused applicant was apprehended in police firing case, in which Rs. 7,100/-, from his pocket was alleged to be recovered, which was been claimed by accused applicant to be his own. There is no specific mark of identity of alleged rupees. Criminal history has been duly explained. Under all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction 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 with certain conditions.

¶10

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant, Uttam Singh, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail on his executing a

¶12

personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶13

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶14

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶15

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶16

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶17

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶18

Order Date :- 3.5.2019 Kamarjahan

Uttam Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uttam 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

Li Zikun Vs State of U.P.

Sadab @ Nizamudeen Vs State of U.P.

Keshari Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Raju Lal Vs State of U.P.

Kunwar Pal @ Mantu Vs State of U.P.