Allowed

Naeem v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2020BAIL/26190/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the applicant, Naeem, in Case Crime No. 48 of 2020 under the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955. Upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, the applicant was ordered to uphold various conditions including non-tampering with evidence, presence in court, and refraining from seeking adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and specific conditions regarding appearance in court and conduct during trial.

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

¶1

Court No. - 34

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26190 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Naeem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 48 of 2020, under Section 3/5/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, Police Station Noorpur, District Bijnor, during pendency of trial.

¶7

To press the bail application of the applicant, it is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not named in the first information report and his name has come into light during the course of investigation. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. There is no recovery from the possession of the applicant. In another case in which the applicant has been implicated under the Cow Slaughter Act, he has been enlarged on bail by this Court. The bail order has been brought on record and appended as Annexure '6' of the paper book. The applicant is languishing in jail since 2.5.2020.

¶8

Learned A.G.A., however, opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made above, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Let applicant- Naeem 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, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶11

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

¶12

(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;

¶13

(iii) 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;

¶14

(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; and

¶15

(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.

¶16

Order Date :- 9.9.2020 Brijesh

Naeem v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naeem 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Das and Ors. Vs State of U.P.

Faizan Ali Vs State of U.P.

Anjan Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Shabban Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Akil Vs State of U.P.

Sohail Vs State of U.P.