Allowed

Phool Chandra and 10 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2020ABAIL/1596/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Allahabad, Coram Siddharth, J., exercised its inherent power under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to grant anticipatory bail to multiple applicants accused of violent crimes. The Court issued a personal bond with two sureties and imposed strict conditions regarding passport surrender, abstinence from influencing witnesses, and presence during critical trial stages.

What did the court decide?

Prayers for anticipatory bail allowed; applicants directed to release on furnishing personal bond with two sureties and complying with specified undertaking conditions.

Phool Chandra and 10 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1596 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Phool Chandra And 10 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Muktesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.

¶6

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Phool Chandra, Ajit, Gulab, Vinod, Girjashankar, Sushil Mishra, Jai Shankar Mishra, Dinesh, Rajpati, Mona and Pushpa, with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 570 of 2019, under Section- 147, 148, 323, 332, 307, 353, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C and Section 3(2) (V) of SC/ST Act and Section 4/24 Arms Act 1959, Police StationMungara Badshahpur, District- Jaunpur , during pendency of trial.

¶7

There is allegation in the first information report that Tehsil authorities went to deliver possession of a disputed property on the application of Savitri Devi where violence took place. 14 persons were implicated. Three persons have been enlarged on bail by the court below. The main role was assigned to co-accused, Rama Shankar and others were generally implicated. Supplementary affidavit has been filed today explaining criminal history of applicant nos. 1,2,3, 10 and 11 which is taken on record.

¶8

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and their antecedents, the applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 and order dated 22.05.2020 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No.2609 of 2020 . The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶9

Let the applicants involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶10

The applicants shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶11

The applicants shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.

¶12

That the applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or

¶13

to any police officer;

¶14

The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicants.

¶15

In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98 .

¶16

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶17

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶18

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶19

Order Date :- 19.11.2020 SS

Phool Chandra and 10 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Phool Chandra and 10 Others 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarvesh @ Tillu Vs State of U.P.

Nakul Vs State of U.P.

Salman Qadeer Vs State of U.P.

Preetam Singh Vs State of U.P.

Brijesh Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Savita Vs State of U.P.