Allowed

Manoj and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Nov 2019BAIL/48786/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to applicants Manoj and Vipin in a criminal case involving IPC Sections 308, 323, 504, and 506, subject to furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties and compliance with specific trial attendance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each subject to specific conditions of attendance and conduct during trial.

Manoj and Another Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48786 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Manoj And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Jatan Yadav,Surendra Nath Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Sri Ajay Vashistha has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the informant today, which is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Ram Jatan Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ajay Vashistha, learned counsel for the informant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Manoj and Vipin , with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 223 of 2019, under Sections 308, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station- Soron, District- Kasganj during pendency of trial.

¶8

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further argued that as per the first information report the role of causing injury to the injured by kicks and fists have been assigned to the applicants whereas the case of the applicants is distinguishable with the case of co-accused Ritesh who caused iron rod injury upon the injured. It is further argued that initially the co-accused Ritesh had lodged an FIR on 11.05.2019 against the opposite parties for causing the injury on his mother and the said injury report has been filed as Annexure No. 06 to the affidavit accompanied with the bail application. The applicants have no criminal history and are languishing in jail since 28.09.2019. In case, they are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicants fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicants by contending that the innocence of the applicants cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, they do not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicants are released on bail they will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , let the applicants involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on their 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:-

¶11

(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

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

¶14

(iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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

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.

¶16

Order Date :- 13.11.2019

¶17

RPD

Manoj and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj and Another 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sumit Vs State of U.P.

Danish Alias Lala Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Abbas Vs State of U.P.

Raj Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Anas Vs State of U.P.

Anuj Vs State of U.P.