In chamber bail application under Section 148, 149, 452, 504, 506, 307 IPC. Court releases applicant on bail with personal bond and conditions similar to an earlier ruling, complying with COVID-19 public interest litigation orders.
Release of applicant on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to 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. - 11568 of 2020
Applicant :- Mohammad Saif @ Shaif Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Goyal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
(i) the applicant is accused of offences under Sections147, 148, 149, 452, 504, 506, 307 I.P.C.;
(ii) against FIR lodged on 12.06.2019, the applicant is in confinement since 17.02.2020;
(iii) the applicant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case, he is not shown to have unduly evaded arrest;
(iv) the applicant has no criminal history;
(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 submitted that wholly general allegations have been made against many accused persons, and therefore, it is difficult to say with any certainty that injury claimed to have been suffered be attributed to the applicant. Also, it has been stated that the co-accused- Ganga Ram & Sonu and Sunny, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail
Application Nos.37800 of 2019 and 49557 of 2019 vide orders dated 24.09.2019 and 15.11.2019 respectively;
(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 :- 2.6.2020 Shubham
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to release on bail in a corruption and assault case with specific conditions.
Whether the bail conditions imposed in a related case should be followed in the present application.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vijay Pratap Verma Vs. State of U.P.Relied on¶17
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11973 of 2020 (Vijay Pratap Verma Vs. State of U.P.)
In re vs. State of U.P.Followed¶27
Public Interest Litigation No. 564 of 2020 (In re vs. State of U.P.)
8 provisions across 3 enactments
Mohammad Saif @ Shaif
Saumitra Dayal Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
