The High Court released the applicant on bail in a murder trial without expressing a view on the merits, circling the larger mandate of Article 21 and referring to a relevant apex court decision.
The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs. two lakhs each.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48308 of 2019
Applicant :- Biruddin @ Munna Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- K.K.Rao Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri K.K. Rao, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I appearing for the State.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of this Court towards the statement of the P.W.-1 which has been annexed as annexure-9 to the affidavit accompanying this bail application, in which the first informant has not supported the prosecution case. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 13.4.2013. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another , reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any view on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let the applicant Biruddin alias Munna involved in Sessions Trial No.112 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime No.102 of 2013, under Section 302 I.P.C., Police Station Hanumanganj, District Kishunagar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties (of Rs.two lakhs) each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the court concerned with the following condition:-
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
Order Date :- 13.11.2019 Dev/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in view of the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution.
Whether the allegations against the applicant are based on false implication warranting bail under special circumstances.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶8
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
6 provisions across 3 enactments
Biruddin @ Munna
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
