Allowed

Anvar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Mar 2019BAIL/5252/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble Court allowed bail to the applicant Anvar, falsely implicated in a case under the Cow Slaughter Act at Rampur. The application was allowed based on allegations of ulterior motives and planted evidence. Bail was granted subject to stringent conditions regarding court attendance and prohibitions on abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Enlargement on bail by executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding court attendance and penalties for default.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5252 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Anvar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Irfan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Mohd. Irfan, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive of the police concerned. There is no independent witness of the alleged incident. It is further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant and a false recovery has been shown from the possession of the applicant, which is planted. It is further submitted that the criminal history of the applicant has properly been explained in para 9 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application. The applicant is in jail since 31.12.2018.

¶7

Keeping in view the nature of submissions advanced, the applicant is entitled for bail.

¶8

Let, the applicant- Anvar involved in Case Crime No. 439 of 2018, under Section 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Azeem Nagar, District- Rampur be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶9

(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.

¶10

(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.

¶11

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial

¶12

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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail. Order Date :- 11.3.2019 Arti

Anvar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anvar 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

Nazim and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Anamulla @ Abdulla Vs State of U.P.

Naushad Vs State of U.P.

Monu Bansal Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Tamanna @ Kallo Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Umar Vs State of U.P.