Allowed

Anupam Pathak and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2020BAIL/40488/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court allowed bail to three applicants in Criminal Case No.155 of 2020 involving assault charges. Relying on Article 21 and Dataram Singh, the Court ruled for bail subject to strict conditions including safety undertakings, via personal bonds without initial sureties, and computerized order verification due to court disruptions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail on personal bond (sureties to follow within a month), subject to strict undertakings and verification of this order.

Anupam Pathak and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40488 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Anupam Pathak And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ishwar Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Two supplementary affidavits filed today are taken on record.

¶6

Heard Shri K.K. Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Shri I.K. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and also perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application filed on behalf of Anupam Pathak, Vimlesh Pathak and Girish Narayan Pathak seeking their bail in connection with Case Crime No.155 of 2020, u/s 147, 308, 323, 504, 506, 452 I.P.C., P.S.-Sikanderpur, District-Ballia.

¶8

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that there was a free fight in between both the parties and from the side of the applicant two persons got injured whereas from the other side four persons got injured. According to doctor, all injured persons have sustained simple injuries. The F.I.R. was got registered by one Rakesh Singh against ten named accused persons, attributing a general role of assault by lathi danda. No doubt, there are as many as four injured persons but all of them have sustained simple injuries and there is no explanation coming forward as to how and under what circumstances two persons got injured from opposite side. Moreover, the applicant no.1 Anupam Pathak is handicapped by 40%. The applicants are in jail since 01.9.2020 having no criminal antecedents.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, 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.

¶11

Let the applicants Anupam Pathak, Vimlesh Pathak and Girish Narayan Pathak, who are involved in aforementioned Case

¶12

Crime be released on bail on their 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.

¶13

(i) THE APPLICANTS SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT THEY SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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

(ii) THE APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH THEIR^{COUNSEL. IN CASE OF THEIR} ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST THEM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶15

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANTS MISUSE THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE THEIR^PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANTS FAIL TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THEM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶16

(iv) THE APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION OF

¶17

THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPLICANTS ARE 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 THEM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶18

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶19

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

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶22

1. The applicants 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.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

4. 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.

¶26

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on their bail so granted by this Court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.

¶27

Order Date :- 2.12.2020 M. Kumar

Anupam Pathak and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anupam Pathak and 2 Others 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

Sanjay Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Atul Jaiswal Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Gupta Vs Stat

Reeta @ Sunita and Another Vs State of U.P.

Dasrath @ Bhaggulal Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Prasad Vs State of U.P.