Allowed

Shyamveer v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Apr 2020BAIL/12101/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application in a case under the U.P. Gangsters Act, releasing the applicant on bail with personal bonds and sureties, modified conditions to address the COVID-19 lockdown, and emphasized strict compliance with attendance and documentation protocols.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions of attendance and documentation.

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

¶1

In Chamber

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12101 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Shyamveer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- R.L. Varma,Chandra Bhushan Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

This bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 744 of 2018, under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station - Jalalabad, District - Shahjahanpur, during pendency of the trial.

¶6

According to First Information Report the applicant has formed a gang with an intent to carry out theft in the locality concerned. As per gang chart annexed, the applicant is accused of committing crimes in Case Crime No. 285/17, under Sections 457, 380, 411 IPC, in Case Crime No. 640/18, under Sections 457, 380, 411 IPC, Police Station - Jalalabad, District - Shahjahanpur. According to the applicant he has been enlarged on bail in both the cases and that he was falsely implicated in the aforesaid cases otherwise. Learned counsel for the applicant has annexed the bail orders of these two cases as Annexure Nos.3 and 4 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. The applicant is languishing in jail since 28.11.2018. There is no other criminal history of the applicant.

¶7

Perused the record and rejection order passed by the court below.

¶8

Let the applicant- Shyamveer involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶9

(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.

¶10

(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

¶11

Code.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

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

¶15

(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶16

(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.

¶17

In view of the extraordinary situation prevailing in the State due to Covid-19, the directions of this Court dated 6.4.2020 passed in Public Interest Litigation No. 564 of 2020 (In re vs. State of U.P.), shall also be complied.

¶18

The order reads thus:

¶19

"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."

¶20

Order Date :- 16.4.2020/Abhishek Singh

Shyamveer v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyamveer 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

Shubham Pal @ Krishna Pal Vs State of U.P.

Sangam Gaur Vs State of U.P.

Akash Solanki Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Usman Vs State of U.P.

Sajid Vs State of U.P.

Sharafat @ Lala Vs State of U.P.