Allowed

Yogendra Kushwaha v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Oct 2019BAIL/27031/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants bail to the applicant in a case concerning illegal liquor manufacturing. The High Court allowed the bail prayer subject to specific conditions including regular court appearances, adherence to trial dates, and monthly reporting to the police station.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two local sureties subject to specific conditions of appearance and conduct.

Yogendra Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27031 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Yogendra Kushwaha Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sujan Singh,Shreesh Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant in Court today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Mr. Sujan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the State as well as perused the material on record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicantYogendra Kushwaha with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 211 of 2019, under Sections 60 (A) of the U.P. Excise Act, Police Station-Ghatampur, DistrictKanpur Nagar, the pendency of the trial.

¶8

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the first information report has been lodged by Hari Shankar on 9th March, 2019 against three accused persons, namely, Raju, Rahul and Suresh alleging therein that all the accused persons were manufacturing and selling illegal liquors from general store due to which brother and two other family members of the informant became ill and two out of them, namely, Shiv Shanker and Virendra died during treatment.

¶9

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to village politics. The applicant has not been named in the first information report. During the course of investigation, his name has surfaced in the present case. Nothing incriminating has neither been recovered from the possession of the applicant nor his pointing out. Only evidence against the applicant is statements of witnesses, who are inimical to the applicant due to village politics. There is no other evidence from which it is established that the applicant is involved in the commission of the alleged offence. The applicant has criminal history of 12 cases but the same has been explained in paragraph-13 of the affidavit accompanying the bail application as also in paragraph-12 of the rejoinder affidavit.

¶10

It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 13th March, 2019. As such, the applicant has undergone more than seven months of incarceration.

¶11

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Considering the the nature of the offence, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

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

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(v) The applicant shall personally appear once in the first week of every month in the concerned Police Station. In case of any default, the In-charge, Police Station shall forthwith inform the concerned court about this breach.

¶18

In case of default of compliance with condition no. (ii) enumerated herein above, the order granting bail shall stand cancelled automatically and the court concerned shall issue non-bailable warrant in order to get the applicant arrested and lodge him in jail.

¶19

Office is required to communicate this order to the S.S.P.

¶20

concerned who is required to convey this order to the concerned police station to ensure compliance of condition no.(v) as provided herein before.

¶21

The concerned court below which will accept the bail bonds is also directed to convey a photo copy of this order to the concerned police station so that the condition no. (v) provided herein before may be complied with.

¶22

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.

¶23

(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.)

¶24

Order Date :- 16.10.2019 Sushil/-

Yogendra Kushwaha v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogendra Kushwaha 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

Imamuddin Vs State of U.P.

Golu @ Mohammad Waaris Vs State of U.P.

Banty Vs State of U.P.

Villa @ Saif Vs State of U.P.

Jogendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Bhagwat Vs State of U.P.