Allowed

Siyaram v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Sept 2019BAIL/34986/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court allowed a bail application under Section 437/439 CrPC filed by Siyaram, who was charged with offences under Sections 392, 411, 420, 468 IPC. The Court observed it was a fit case for bail despite not expressing an opinion on merits, noting the offence is triable by a Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail upon execution of a personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions regarding evidence, witnesses, and future conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34986 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Siyaram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Farooque Ansari,Mangal Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Siyaram in connection with Case Crime No.34 of 2019, under Sections 392, 411, 420, 468 I.P.C., P.S. Fatehpur Siukri, District Agra.

¶7

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that as per the allegation of the first information report that on 21.02.2019 tempo of complainant was looted by some unknown persons and the said looted tempo was intercepted on 13.04.2019 and was allegedly recovered from the joint possession of the applicant and another coaccused Bhura. He submitted that the alleged joint recovery is totally fake and false and there is no public witness of the alleged recovery. He further submitted that no proper identification parade was conducted by the police. He submitted that all the offences are triable by the court of Magistrate. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 14.04.2019 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea.

¶9

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶10

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Siyaram involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶12

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶13

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;

¶14

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶15

iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;

¶16

v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any

¶17

inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

Order Date :- 13.9.2019

¶19

R./

Siyaram v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Siyaram 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

Nanak Chand and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Ajab Narayan Pandey @ Munna Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Vs State of U.P.

Akhilesh Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Subhash Vs State of U.P.