Allowed

Rakshpal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Aug 2020BAIL/4278/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for bail in a criminal trial case where the applicant had previously absconded but surrendered later. The High Court granted bail subject to stringent personal bonds and strict attendance conditions to prevent future default or abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 and two sureties in the like amount, subject to strict conditions regarding attendance and conduct.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4278 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rakshpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Vikram Yadav,Awadh Bihari Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Rakshpal with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 94 of 1997 (S.S.T. No. 31 of 1998), under Sections 399, 401 IPC, Police Station Bichhwa, District- Mainpuri, during pendency of trial.

¶7

The applicant was initially enlarged on bail around the year 2006 and he attended the trial court up to 21.4.2008,thereafter he absconded from the proceedings of the court.After proceedings under section 82 and 83 Cr.P.c. he surrendered before the court on 18.2.2019 and he is in jail since then.It is submitted that it was case lodged by the police and no witness was turning up before the trial court.Applicant is labour and went to Hariyana for earning livelihood and could not return therefore his bail was cancelled.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. one lac and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court

¶10

concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶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 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.

¶14

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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.

¶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

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

¶17

Order Date :- 6.8.2020 Atul kr. sri.

Rakshpal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakshpal 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

Smt. Rekha and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Irfanuddin Vs State of U.P.

Krishnakant Raghav @ K.K.Raghav @ Kedar Raghav Vs State of U.P.

Shahzad Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Vs State of U.P.

Meenu @ Brijesh Vs State of U.P.