Allowed

Rahul v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Jun 2020BAIL/14900/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed. Court took supplementary affidavit on record. Ruled that applicant made out a case for bail without expressing opinion on merits, citing Dataram Singh principle and Article 21. Granted bail with conditions including personal bond and verification of order authenticity.

What did the court decide?

Allowed bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions including verification of the order.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14900 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rahul Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shivanand Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Shivanand Mishra, counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today along with free copy of bail rejection order. The same is taken on record.

¶7

The allegation against the applicant is that on 14.12.2019 he caused injuries to the injured.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant has pointed out to the injury report of the injured regarding his medical examination held on 14.12.2019 at 12:30 p.m. FIR has been lodged on 15.12.2019 at 08:35 a.m. It has been submitted that the injury report was prepared one day ago. In the report it has been mentioned that the injured was brought to the hospital by constable, Manjula Gautam. It has been submitted that the injury report is anti timed. FIR has been lodged later. It is a case of false implication. The injured received injury somewhere else. He is in jail since 18.12.2019 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, argument advanced on behalf of the parties, 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.

¶10

Let the applicant- Rahul , in Case Crime No. 0190 of 2019, under Sections- 498-A, 323, 307 IPC, Police Station- Chaubia, District- Etawah, 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.

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the 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 :- 19.6.2020 Rohit

Rahul v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raj Kishor @ Pappu Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Alias Bablu Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Govinda Vs State of U.P.

Shakeel Vs State of U.P.

Beerbal Pasi Vs State of U.P.