Allowed

Guddu @ Mohsin v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Oct 2020BAIL/17896/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving multiple IPC sections. Conditions for release included filing a personal bond, submission of sureties, and undertakings against tampering with evidence or seeking unnecessary adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding evidence tampering and court attendance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 81

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17896 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Guddu @ Mohsin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Mishra,Sanjay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No.319 of 2017, under Sections 366, 386, 394, 411, 328/34, 120B, 376-D IPC, Police Station Gagalhedi, District Saharanpur with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶7

For the purpose of considering the second bail application, the Court notes that the victim has in the course of trial failed to support the prosecution version and has been declared hostile. It has next been submitted that the applicant is in jail since 19 September 2017 and in case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions noticed above, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Let applicant Guddu @ Mohsin be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions,

¶11

which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶13

(ii) 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.

¶14

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) 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.

¶16

(v) 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.

¶17

Order Date :- 14.10.2020 faraz

Guddu @ Mohsin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu @ Mohsin 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

Rakesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunil Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep Verma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Jaikumar @ Jaikup Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manish Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.