Allowed

Amar Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Aug 2020BAIL/11086/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court issued bail in a criminal case where the applicant, charged with murder and other offences, claimed an exhortation role. The court granted bail without expressing opinion on merits, adhering to principles regarding apprehension of witness tampering and severity of punishment.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on personal bond with two sureties, subject to undertaking against adjournment, passport surrender, and presence at trial dates.

Amar Singh Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

In Chamber

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11086 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Amar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Ram (Rawat),Giri Ram Rawat,Indra Deo Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamal Kishor Mishra,Tarun Pratap Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

¶5

As per the Office report dated 18.08.2020, an urgency application has been moved on behalf of the applicant in the present bail application through e.mail, which has been allowed vide order dated 18.08.2020, hence the present bail application has come before this Court today in the cause list of fresh cases. The the Court thus proceeds to hear the matter.

¶6

Heard Sri I.D. Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Shri Ram Rawat, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Tarun Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the complainant, Sri Amrit Raj Chaurasia, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State through Video Conferencing and perused the record.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that though the applicant is named in F.I.R., but he has only been assigned with the role of exhortation. So far as other coaccused persons are concerned, they have assaulted the deceased with lathi-danda and brickbat. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent. The applicant is in jail since3.12.2019.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the deceased has suffered injuries on his chest and as per the post mortem report, death of deceased did take place due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of anti mortem chest, but could not dispute the fact that the role assigned to the applicant was only of exhortation.

¶9

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶10

Let the applicant Amar Singh involved in Case Crime No.1012 of 2019, under Sections 302, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Vrindavan, District Mathura, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned and the court concerned shall take an undertaking from the sureties that the properties movable/immovable which are the basis of accepting the surety, shall not be disposed of by them during the pendency of the trial with the following conditions:-

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(v) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, before the trial court & shall furnish an undertaking not to leave the country until permission is obtained by him from this Court or till the conclusion of the trial.

¶16

The case of the applicant is distinguishable from other coaccused persons, who stated to have assaulted the deceased.

¶17

The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile

¶18

number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 19.8.2020 Tamang

Amar Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amar Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rohit Shrma @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P.

Maya Devi Vs State of U.P.

Khusboon Vs State of U.P.

Atarkali Vs State of U.P.

Devendra and Another Vs State of U.P.

Yasin Vs State of U.P. and Another