Allowed

Bharat v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Dec 2020BAIL/45471/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a short order granting bail in a bail application filed under the Arms Act. The Single Judge found that prima facie a case for bail was made out, citing law laid down in an Apex Court decision, and released the applicant subject to strict conditions regarding presence in court.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties subject to strict conditions regarding court attendance.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45471 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Bharat Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Tripathi,Gautam Dubey,Surya Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Gautam Dubey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 84 of 2020 under Section 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station - Pahari, District - Chitrakoot with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶7

The report of this incident was lodged by the complainant against the present applicant under the Arms Act.

¶8

The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that from the present accused Bharat a country-made pistol was allegedly shown recovered with live cartridge, which is entirely false and fabricated as there is no public witness to the alleged recovery shown by the police. It is further submitted that the criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraphs No. 13 and 14 of the affidavit filed in support of this bail application. It is also argued that the offence is triable by the Court of Magistrate. Lastly, it is argued that the applicant is in jail since 05.07.2020 and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

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

¶10

Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention of the applicant and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another (2018) 3 SCC 22, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.

¶11

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶12

Let applicant Bharat involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶13

(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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

(2). 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;

¶15

(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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 may initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(4). 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶17

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the learned counsel for the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 10.12.2020 LBY

Bharat v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharat 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

Premlata and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Chaman Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rakesh Vs State of U.P.

Neksu Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Kushwaha @ Shyam Karan Vs State of U.P.

Sudarshan Singh Vs State of U.P.