Prem v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
Court granted bail to applicant Prem, admitted in error when previously on bail, in a case under Section 304 IPC.
What did the court decide?
Applicant Prem released on bail required to furnish personal bond and two heavy sureties with assurance of regular appearance.
What the court decided
Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55299 of 2019
Applicant :- Prem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamesh Kumar Arya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was on bail in this case but did not appear before the trial court and this was reason that he was again sent to jail and he is in jail since 20.4.2018.
Per contra, learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Prem involved in Case Crime No. 66 of 2016, (S.T. No. 641 of 2016), under Section 304 IPC, P.S. Nagphani. District Moradabad be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the direction that the applicant shall appear before the trial court regularly on the date fixed, in case of default the court shall take appropriate action against the applicant.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant, who failed to appear in court while on bail, is entitled to bail again.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Prem
Coram
Bachchoo Lal
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · December
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/55299/2019
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court