Dismissed

Raj Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Jan 2019BAILC/1763/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed a bail cancellation application moved by the applicant only, noting the application lacked merit and jurisdiction. The Court held the matter falls for the trial court's adjudication but disposed of the application with liberty to file fresh application before the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed with liberty to file fresh bail cancellation application before the trial court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 1763 of 2015

¶3

Applicant :- Raj Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ratan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

None is present on behalf of the applicant even in the revised list/call.

¶6

Heard learned AGA and perused the record.

¶7

This bail cancellation application has been moved by the applicant/complainant to cancel the bail order dated 9.12.2014 passed by the learned Special Judge, (Dacoity Affected Area) Etah in bail application no. 1407 of 2014 in pursuance of Case Crime No. 62A of 2014, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 379, 307 and 304 IPC, Police Station Pilua, District Etah whereby Subhas Yadav accused/opposite party no. 2 was granted bail.

¶8

In the case of Shahzad Hasan Khan v. Ishtiq, AIR 1987 SC 1613, the Apex Court has held that in the absence of sufficient materials to show that the accused was threatening the informant, bail granted cannot be cancelled.

¶9

In the case of Daulat Ram Vs. State of Haryana, AIR 1995 SC 1998 it was held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the order under this section may be passed on the following grounds:-

¶10

"1. When the accused is found tampering with the evidence either during the investigation or during the trial.

¶11

When the persons on bail commits similar offence or any heinous offence during the period of bail.

¶12

When the accused has absconded and trial of the case gets delayed on that account.

¶13

When the offence so committed by the accused had created serious law and order problem in the society and accused had become a hazard on the peaceful living of the people.

¶14

If the High Court finds that the lower Court granting bail has exercised its judicial power wrongly.

¶15

If the High Court or Sessions Courts find that the accused has

¶16

misused the privilege of bail.

¶17

If the life of the accused itself be in danger."

¶18

Ground of cancellation is related to facts which cannot be adjudicated by this Court and it can be decided by the Tiral court where the case is pending for trial.

¶19

This bail cancellation application has not been moved by the State.

¶20

Moreover, in view of law laid down in the case of Abdul Basit @ Raju and others vs. Mohd. Abdul Kadir Chaudhary and another (2014) 10 SCC 754 , this application would lie before the Court of Session Judge, not before the High Court, hence application is disposed off with liberty to file fresh bail cancellation application before the trial Court and if applicant files bail cancellation application, it is expected from the trial Court to decide the same on merit in accordance with law expeditiously.

¶21

The present bail cancellation application is disposed of accordingly.

¶22

Certify this judgment to the lower court immediately.

¶23

Order Date :- 3.1.2019 OP

Raj Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Awadhesh Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Singh @ Nate Vs State of U.P.

Shahzad Vs State of U.P.

Prem Pal and Others Vs State

Rampal and Another Vs State of U.P.

Shobharam Vs State of U.P.