Allowed

Rishit @ Cheenu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Sept 2020BAIL/14738/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allowed a bail application for an applicant falsely implicated in a dacoity case. The court, citing novel coronavirus risks in jails and relying on Apex Court precedent, released the applicant on personal bond and two sureties pending normal court functioning.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties, conditions pending normal court functioning.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14738 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rishit @ Cheenu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Dev Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

¶6

The allegation against the applicant is that he was involved in the offence of dacoity.It is submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He was arrested in an encounter case on 2.2.2020 and falsely implicated in the this case and four other cases.The applicant is in jail since 1.3.2020. He has criminal history of nine cases explained in paragraph-4 to the supplementary affidavit.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact..

¶8

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, argument advanced on behalf of the parties, spreading of novel corona virus in jails, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant, Rishit @ Cheenu, who is involved in Case Crime No. 71 of 2020, under Sections 395 I.P.C, Police Station-Phase-2 , District- Gautam Budh Nagar, 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶10

The applicant shall not tamper with the

¶11

prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his bail shall be effective after the period of short term bail comes to an end.

¶15

The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 1.9.2020 Atul kr. sri.

Rishit @ Cheenu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishit @ Cheenu 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Pal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Raju Vs State of U.P.

Mohan Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ompal Vs State of U.P.

Lal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Kundan Seth Alias Sandeep Singh Vs State of U.P.