Allowed

Balveer Singh v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC3 Jun 2020ABAIL/2482/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, Balveer Singh, in a case involving Sections 379/411 IPC and U.P. Mines & Minerals Rules. The applicant, charged with unauthorized sand loading, was directed to be released on a bond with specific conditions including passport surrender and appearance before the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties and specific conditions regarding passport surrender, non-interference with witnesses, and court appearance.

Balveer Singh Vs State of U.P.and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

In Chamber

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2482 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Balveer Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Devesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

This bail application is being disposed of as per the order dated 4.4.2020 of Hon'ble the Chief Justice.

¶6

Notice of this application was served on the Government Advocate on 30.03.2020 but as yet no objection has been filed on behalf of the State.Notice on Government Advocate is sufficient as per section 438(3) Cr.P.c. (U.P. Amendment). Hence this application is being finally decided.

¶7

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Balveer Singh, with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No.16 of 2020, under Sections 379, 411 I.P.C. and Sections 3, 57, 70 of U.P Mines & Minerals (Prevention) Rules 1963, Police StationTehrauli, District- Jhansi, during pendency of trial.

¶8

The allegation against the applicant is that he was loading sand unauthorizedly and caught by the police.

¶9

It has been averred in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application is that applicant is member of Block Development Committee of the village. He has been falsely implicated in this case since he has refused to give his tractor to the employees of the Mines Department, who keep on demanding his tractor for their work. The applicant was not present on the spot. He has no criminal history to his credit. Even otherwise a complaint is required to be filed for offence under the Mines and Mineral Act. No charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicant.

¶10

Hence the applicant is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail 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

¶11

applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶12

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.

¶13

Let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

That the applicant 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 to any police officer;

¶17

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicant.

¶18

In case, the applicant 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.

¶19

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

¶20

him in accordance with law.

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

Order Date :- 3.6.2020 SS

Balveer Singh v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balveer Singh 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

Sumit Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Naushad Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kunwar Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sahansar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suresh Vs State of U.P.

Aakash Dubey and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.