In a bail application filed under Sections 304, 272 IPC and 60(A) Excise Act, the court released the applicant on personal bond instead of sureties due to the pandemic. Conditions were imposed to prevent tampering with witnesses and ensuring trial attendance.
Released on personal bond and two sureties in the like amount under specified conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
In Chamber
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11055 of 2020
Applicant :- Harendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Nandan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
(i) the applicant is accused of offences under Sections304, 272 I.P.C. and 60(A) Excise Act;
(ii) against FIR lodged on 11.03.2019, the applicant is in confinement since 05.07.2019 i.e. almost eleven months;
(iii) the applicant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case, he is not shown to have unduly evaded arrest;
(iv) as to criminal history, it has been stated that upon the applicant being made an accused in the present case, certain other cases also have been lodged against the applicant;
(v) chargesheet has already been submitted yet there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial;
(vi) on prima facie basis, only for purpose of grant of bail, it has been stated that the applicant has been completely falsely implicated, inasmuch as, specific allegation of selling spurious liquor was made against three named accused persons namely, Vimal Kushwaha, Amit Awasthi
@ Omi and Rahul Kushwaha. Thus neither the applicant was named in the FIR nor any recovery was made from him. However, he has been charged solely on the basis of the statement of the co-accused-Amit Awasthi @ Omi, who has falsely named the applicant. In any case, Amit Awasthi @ Omi has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.50382 of 2019 vide order dated 23.01.2020 ;
(vii) in any case, no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witnesses.
(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.
(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.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial 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.
(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.
(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vii) 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.
" Looking to impediments in arranging sureties because of lockdown, while invoking powers under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, we deem it appropriate to order that all the accused-applicants whose bail applications came to be allowed on or after 15th March, 2020 but have not been released due to non-availability of sureties as a consequence to lockdown may be released on executing personal bond as ordered by the Court or to the satisfaction of the jail authorities where such accused is imprisoned, provided the accusedapplicants undertakes to furnish required sureties within a period of one month from the date of his/her actual release. "
Order Date :- 1.6.2020 Shubham
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is liable to be released on bail under the specified conditions.
Whether bail conditions regarding attendance and preventing abuse of liberty should be imposed.
Whether the application of the COVID-19 special order regarding execution of personal bond mandates compliance.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Amit Awasthi @ OmiReferred¶15
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 50382 of 2019
Vijay Pratap Verma Vs. State of U.P.Followed¶17
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11973 of 2020 (Vijay Pratap Verma Vs. State of U.P.)
In re vs. State of U.P.Applied¶26
Public Interest Litigation No. 564 of 2020 (In re vs. State of U.P.)
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Harendra
Saumitra Dayal Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
